I saw a bunch of supposedly serious people promote the book as some insightful revisionist history. Like, Nasser was a dictator no doubt who was harmful to the Arab left and people have a romantic view of him, but the book was just glib polemics.
Excellent review ya Hamalawy. The book is intriguing because of the interviews the authors conducted with Soviet veterans of operations Kavkaz. But the books is ultimately flawed for the reason you clearly articulated: an inability to acknowledge the remarkable Egyptian achievement in rebuilding their armed forces is such a fundamental manner and in such a short period following the harrowing defeat of 67. And this inability to acknowledge Arab agency, in turn, is deeply rooted in Israeli hubris, conceit and racism.
Great review. I doubt it is still as flawed a revisionist history as Alex Rowell's We Are Your Soldiers.
Rowell's book could simply be summed up in one sentence: Nasser was the antichrist
I saw a bunch of supposedly serious people promote the book as some insightful revisionist history. Like, Nasser was a dictator no doubt who was harmful to the Arab left and people have a romantic view of him, but the book was just glib polemics.
Excellent review ya Hamalawy. The book is intriguing because of the interviews the authors conducted with Soviet veterans of operations Kavkaz. But the books is ultimately flawed for the reason you clearly articulated: an inability to acknowledge the remarkable Egyptian achievement in rebuilding their armed forces is such a fundamental manner and in such a short period following the harrowing defeat of 67. And this inability to acknowledge Arab agency, in turn, is deeply rooted in Israeli hubris, conceit and racism.