Let's see if this works...

Couscous is like the universe, say the Sufis; within an infinite substrate lie far separated clusters of sweetness which explode into life when the seeker encounters them.

They say nothing of the sort, of course, but it sounds like something they might say so let's roll with it.

If you happen, say, to own a tagine pot you brought back from Morocco and use as often as you can despite your nephew having broken the base for the coals so you have to use the damn thing over an open flame on a gas range, you can make TRUE couscous.

To make a true couscous, you need time. You soak the couscous in water, you prepare the raw ingredients, you layer them into the mix in your tagine pot, you gently simmer everything over coals for hours, you eat it with friends, on a rooftop in Marrakesh, laughing with beautiful, perfect teeth.

But this is the 21st century, drones patrol the skies, the environment is collapsing, Bladerunner was optimism. WE DON'T HAVE TIME FOR THAT SHIT.

Let's do TURBO COUSCOUS.

TO THE BAT SHOP. Or rather, the local Moroccan shop, which has two important things.

1) Fresh, inexpensive ingredients:

2) Arabic bread

Now I don't eat bread but that stuff is delicious and spongey and perfect for soaking up sauces and dipping in dips. It great to have on the table with a bunch of friends tearing off strips. I didn't buy any this evening but let's just imagine I did; it's warm, as it's freshly baked, it smells like heaven and sesame and it's already making you hungry, kay? Kay.

Back in the Bat Kitchen, we are going to start prepping. You can pull this entire meal off in around half an hour. 21st century, remember? First, you need fuel. The last of the Caol Ila.

You also need to be someone who happens to have insane amounts of weird herbs and spices to hand at all times. This is just a selection of the ones we're going to use.

So, first, you discover you happen to have an aubergine to hand and the taste of the whisky makes you reckless. You know it's one pot cooking but what the hell, you decide to cheat. I'm going to cheat. DO SOMETHING.

You roast that aubergine over a naked flame. It's actually illegal to roast aubergines in an oven. They become flavourless, lack smoke and people will shun you. Instead, turn it over an open flame until it becomes blackened on the outside and oozes juices that are going to take a long, long time to scrub out of the metal.

Meanwhile you are finely chopping ingredients. You can use anything you like, really, but these are my staple couscous food groups. Red, green, white and meat; that's two kinds of pepper, onion, halal meat from the afore-visited Moroccan shop and over there beside it a couple of chopped garlic cloves and a couple of chopped chillis.

There in the little bowl are two chopped tomatoes steeped in Modena vinegar. They were actually given to me by a friend, sourced from her garden, but we can count 'em in the price anyway.

Disclaimer: on the whole I'm veg and I'll make this with soaked lentils or lentils and chick peas instead of meat but tonight the whisky is making me wild. If you're going to substitute, just treat the legumes like the meat.

Meanwhile in the DISH OF CHEATING I've thrown three tablespoons of tahini. Add a squirt of lemon juice, some of that chopped garlic and some paprika, blend and you have a paste. A delicious, cheating paste.

Time for a quick change of drinks. The world's tiniest G&T.

Mix the remaining garlic, the chilli, some soya sauce, some cumin with the meat (or lentils) and let it steep. I also added hibiscus paste because awesome. If you can season for the whole day, so much the better, but this is the 21st century so we'll steep it until you start cooking it, dammit.

How's our cheating aubergine doing? Deliciously charred on the outside and squishy on the inside you say? Hello.

Strain the excess juices, crush and mash.

And blend with the delicious paste of cheating from earlier.

That's right, my friends. Baba Ganoush.

Meanwhile, the couscous. Here's 21st century speed couscous: equal parts water and couscous. If you are splendid, like _refugee_ you can use vegetable stock in place of water, which gives the couscous more flavour. You can also drop in half a cube of vegetable stock if that's all you have, but nothing that contains monosodium glutamate or the stars will cry.

Water in the pan, a teaspoon of olive oil, bring to the boil, throw in the the couscous, bring it back to the boil, lid on and heat off. Leave it alone. LEAVE IT.

Now this is supposed to be a single pot dish, thus after a few minutes and once we've fluffed our now yearning, swollen couscous with a fork and another dash of olive oil, let's get it out of the way to leave room to cook the rest...

A perfect time to pause and move on to Jamaican rum.

Onions first, in a tiny dab of butter. Butter is not bad; ask Michael Pollan; it also helps to brown the onion. Keep the lid on! What are you, psychotic? That will keep the onions from drying out.

Add the meat (or lentil) mix and brown through a little, then the rest of the vegetables.

I like to add peas. Keep that filthy canned stuff away from me; best peas are frozen peas.

After a few minutes, you can add a couple of spoons of tahini and a similar amount of pure peanut paste (peanut butter will do if you have nothing else and are willing to be pursued through all the circles of hell by lesser demons for all eternity).

Season with a splash of vinegar (no, really). Allow the steam to rise, you don't want it to be too liquid, nor too dry. Finally, tip in your couscous, stir nicely, lid on and allow it to sit and steep for a while.

This quantity will serve 4 - 6. Imagine the bread is sitting on the table too. There is the tomato which you can spoon over a full bowl of couscous to add moisture and zesty flavour, there's the harissa which will spice things up if the chillis don't do it for you, there's the illegal baba ganoush which you can either dip with imaginary bread or spoon over the couscous.

And to drink? I like my vodka like I like my post-modern pro-feminist Disney fable reimaginings....

Frozen.

As for the accounting, this is tricky. Already to hand, the couscous, the spices, the tahini. Even the unlawful aubergine lurked in the fridge. The tomatoes were a gift but let's add them in regardless. Everything I bought amounts to around 8 euros BUT! I used half the veg and only a third of the meat which by rough calculation means around 4 - 5 euros. Add a euro for imaginary bread which will also feed four to six, say 50 cents for an aubergine, 10 cents each for the spoons of tahini and pure peanut paste, 25 cents for the lemon I already had, another 25 for a handful of frozen peas and we're looking at maybe 6 - 7 euros (7 - 8 dollars) for the whole thing; $1 to $1.50 a head; which leaves 14 euros for 2 - 3 good bottles of local wine.

COUSCOUS 1 onion 1 green capsicum 1 red capsicum 2 green 'guindillas' (chillis) 2 garlic cloves 1 tbspn hibiscus paste 1 fist sized lump of steak 1 handful fresh / frozen peas 1 cup couscous 2 tbspns tahini 2 tbspns peanut puree Salt / pepper / soy / vinegar / cumin

BABA GANOUSH 1 aubergine 3 tbspns tahini Juice of 1/2 lemon Pinches of salt, paprika 1/2 garlic clove

GARNISH 2 tomatoes Dash of salt, dash of Modena vinegar

According to his editor, DFW thought that everything in the novel was necessary for the work as a whole. Post-modernism operates partially in response to stream-of-consciousness modernist lit, wherein the authors (Joyce et al) admittedly vomited onto a page in order to authentically capture, without editing, the essential element of literature, the authorship and the artist's mind-gaze, so I would hesitate at thinking it is just a flurry of homeless ideas. Also, he admitted to using the footnotes as a way to disrupt the narrative and any linearity you even have. Confusion is only natural and this is part of the experience of reading the novel. You will not gain much by following just the plot while reading. The joy is simply reading the work and the thoughts pouring out.

There's a world of difference between post-modern philosophy and post-modern literature, but DFW was aware of both as the son of a philosopher and he incorporates some hard-line philosophy into his work, however, post-modernism in literature is also (partly) about the relationship of the author to the work, the reader, the voice, and other literary forebears. This is not to say these things were not taken into account beforehand, but previously was not so endemic in the writing.

The "asides" and plots tangential to the main thread is an stylistically classic example of post-modern literature. Italian Neorealism also contained some concurrent stylistic choices (though obviously the gaze is literally controlled by a director, so there are essential differences, but this video helps visually elaborate similar stylistic choices), namely a focus on the world inhabited by the characters and not simply treating them as background actors (or "figurants", DFW ruminates on this at a later point in the novel. the relationship of the characters to the main plot is very very important, and pay attention to that. Not necessarily what they are doing in the plot, but their relationship to the plot. ie, how many of them make choices, what choices does anyone make, are any of them drone-like in response to the robust environment around them? are you even watching the main characters of the actual story?)

The term for such a splayed-out world is an Encyclopedic Novel. The ability to not just regurgitate common narratives, but instead investigate their origins and the fractionation amongst the belief systems, and where the knowledge to build these ideologies comes from is central to this stylistic choice (he does this a lot with his elaborations on trope-y sayings ("One day at a a time") the context of their meaning and assmiliation). It is not a whimsical one done idly. This is a driving force amongst post-modern lit to discuss our relationship with knowledge and information, which I believe to be an important aspect considering we now live in such a fractalized and information-rich society.

In video games, I would say that that is less of an meaningful choice to establish an idea in the narrative, but to generate further environmental and emotional investment in the plot and characters. Not to say that they are not indebted to literary and film influence, but I don't think they have sufficiently matured to the point at which you can say either "This is an art form that encompasses all possibilities of the form" or "they contribute to the understanding of their place in society"

It's difficult to try and parse out exactly "Why" each character and plot is weaved in, but they have some significance and meaning, and a lot of times these digressions are used to reinforce and elaborate on particular themes (of which there are a lot in IJ), to provide counterpoints, or different interpretations.

Don't sweat too much trying to tease apart a plot, you will miss half of the real reason why this novel is so enjoyable and thought-provoking, and going back afterwards and finding a timeline of chronology is easy to (do not do this while reading). Really think about who's eyes you are looking through and what contains meaning in all the information. DFW did not just put the puzzle pieces on a table and say "figure it out", post-modernism is looking at the pieces, realizing most of the shapes don't even match or are redundant, then wondering about the economic system that brought the puzzle to the store you bought it from, what the worker's lives are like who made the thing, and if they've even know what or will ever see for themselves the Eiffel Tower on the front of the box.

Ugh.

I've still been away for a while, but this topic irks me so much for some reason that I have to jump into the fold again.

I eat meat. I enjoy meat a lot. I've been a hunter for a decade now as well, but very rarely get out. Guns and ammo are expensive, yo. nowaypablo mentioned getting a wild pig. I can tell you nothing is more exhilarating and terrifying than boar hunting. And really, Pablo, we should do that some time.

So that's one level of things to tackle. People want to make that mention of 'more ethical meat'. So let's lay out the levels of arguments on meat.

-The one I already mentioned, those that don't oppose meat eating when you're hunting for it, or at a stricter level, those are hunt meat to survive. These are the vegetarians that are able to take a step back from their First World privilege where they have the ability to not eat meat and recognize that other places in the world have no choice. Okay. Cool.

-The types of people that have no problems with meat being eaten by others, but don't personally want to. I don't see an issue with this. These are people that are usually conflicted in some way about taking a life or find animals adorable or have the ability to not eat meat without much issue. They recognize that they have their choices, and other people have theirs, and stepping into others' lives claiming 'ethics' is a breach of boundaries and common decency, despite whether they believe animals have freedom of choice or consciousness.

-The vegetarian, usually vegan as well, that opposes the entire entire of meat or animal products, that they are morally superior for not using these products in any way at all, and it is their god-given duty (and I mean God-given, as this more closely resembles Christian religious evangelism than anything else) to tell every last person on Earth about it. These are the people who don't take a step back from their position of privilege to understand there are other circumstances, and who will spout that even 'free range animals would prefer to be free than eaten :)' when, no, in reality, they'll still be eaten, just not by humans, and I don't think you understand that wolves don't have consideration for ethical killing, nor do they really care about the quality of life of creatures living in the wild vs. living in a range managed by humans. I think this is the most fantasy world that's most disconnecting humans and animals, despite their claims of "one in the same!" because they have some idea of an equation where "animals - humans = peaceful harmony where everything lives forever and is cute and happier."

-Lastly, the people who don't oppose meat, but oppose factory farms. I feel like factory farms are what lead most people to be vegetarians in the first place. I subscribe to this pretty well, for a lot of reasons. Nothing should have to have a miserable life, whether it has consciousness or not. A chicken doesn't care if its life purpose is to be eaten, but it does care if it never moves. Animals should have a high standard of living that meets or exceeds what it would in the wild (i.e. space, regular feeding, medication, safety). Beyond this, at a capitalist level, removing corporations and strong-arming small and family farms is absolutely fucking vital to every country. Allowing corporations to wholesale owning agriculture and food is one of the most dangerous things possible in the long term, and it isn't addressed enough.

Of course I have conflicted feelings on eating meat. There's always the chance of it turning out that every animal on Earth is exactly as conscious and aware of everything as humans are. But I don't see where that leads to making eating meat morally wrong. Everything dies at some point. Everything. Death is the absolute most important part of the life cycle. Why it shouldn't serve a purpose of sustenance of other creatures and enjoyment of others is beyond me. To discuss moral questions, one of the things that rustles my feathers most is Western human funeral procedures. We die, fill our bodies with toxic chemicals, seal them in boxes, and bury them, where they cannot become a part of the life cycle, and don't feed other creatures. How is that not wrong? We should provide animals freedom to die, or be eaten by other animals, but when you factor humans into the creatures that eat them, it becomes different because we're aware of what we're doing, or planning it agriculturally somehow it inverts it? And at the same time, we don't believe in the Earth completing its cycles naturally in our deaths, and well, fucking billions of other ways as well.

But sure. I can't actually come up with a reason why one should eat meat, in a wealthy, first world country with other options. Because there are other options, and you are taking a life from eating meat. If you find that makes you uncomfortable, that's your own right. There's nothing wrong with not eating meat. I simply don't find anything particularly wrong with eating it either. That's my stance, at least. I enjoy it. I don't find qualms with myself enjoying it. It's going to get eaten completely regardless, by other animals or 'eaten' by the soil when it dies. 'Life' is such weird, vague, ethereal concept to the human mind as it is, limiting it to the discussion of whether we should eat something is bewildering.

Personal anecdote on hunting: I have always found that hunting-- and most other hunters seem to think this way too, across the whole gamut of people who hunt-- is an activity that is completely a commune with nature and evokes an enormous respect for the world around you. I can't express what it's like to be tracking a deer for three days in the woods. You have every kind of life around you, and the majority of your time is spent is silence, and hopefully reverence. You try to understand the patterns of everything around you and the animal you're hunting. The kill isn't really the focal point at all, it's usually just a rote part of the cycle. You kill the animal to clean the animal, the use the parts of the animal for a world of necessary things, and you have the meat and energy provided by the animal to sustain yourself and others. It's a wonderful thing. And that hippy-dippy "one with nature" bullshit isn't possible without something like that. You can't separate yourself from animals and believe that you're respecting it when you simply close your eyes and cover your ears as to how the systems of nature work. It's belittling to believe you love the animals and respect them just because you don't eat them.

This reads more spiritual than I meant for it to be. Perhaps that's good, because most of the arguments against meat seem to read spiritually as well.

It's easy to become cynical in a world where we are inundated with information about how shitty the planet is. As bad as it is, this is STILL the best time to ever be alive as a human. We've never been healthier, happier, better fed, or more egalitarian than we are now. That doesn't matter though, suffering isn't a Penis-measuring contest. the secret to prevent being cynical or encouraging cynical behaviour, I've found, is to give a fuck about the right things. You know the old Alcoholics Anonymous prayer?

   God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
   The courage to change the things I can,
   And the wisdom to know the difference.

Of course, this raises the question of what to give a fuck about, and what makes something the right or wrong thing to give a fuck about. In my opinion, these are one or two of the things you should NOT give a fuck about:

- Things that are "wrong" but that don't directly hurt people (like that really shitty merge about 1/3 of the way through your commute that's always backed up, and you KNOW that if everyone just kept to the lefthand lanes and let people coming onto the highway have room to get up to speed it would be fine but NO ONE ever does that and it makes you crazy because if we were just a LITTLE bit more efficient then we wouldn't have this stupid slow down on my commute and so on and so forth).

- The bad habits that other people have / how other people live their life (if it doesn't directly affect you) . Don't let judgement control your life. Right now there's a girl at my school (she's a sophomore this year). Last year she showed up, super clean cut, a bit bible-thumpy. She started to hang out with a lot of the band kids who were of african descent (to whom I bear no judgement) and this year she showed up with a weave and her best attempts to adopt African american fashion (whatever she percieved that to be in NE Ohio). She's gotten a HUGE amount of weird looks and judgment for it, and I think it's bullshit. I treat her exactly the same as I ever did - I'm not overly friendly, nor am I standoffish. I wave hello in the halls, ask about a day if we happen to be in the elevator together. I see in her my own attempts to find myself and my identity.

Some things you decide to not give a fuck about may even be completely worthwhile, things like charities, or social causes. That's fine, One person can't care deeply about everything, and many people you meet will be upset that you don't care deeply about the same causes they do EVEN IF you try and keep up.

Here are some of the things you SHOULD give a fuck about:

- Things you can change in your daily life that will make your life,and the life of your community better. Social issues that matter to you. Whether it be composting, or talking with your neighbours to create a sense of community, or calling your city counsellor about that sidewalk near 4th and Elm (you know, the one that's weirdly tall? the one Mrs. Patil has a hard time getting over nowadays since she had that fall. You talked to her, so you know that, right?)

- Your hobbies. ALWAYS make time for the things you love to do. thenewgreen is not a professional musician (by which i mean that is not the method by which he makes his living). He is the original definition of Amateur, before it became a bad thing: One who works at and practices something because they love it, not for financial gain. All of the people I know who are displeased with their lives feel that they have no time for their hobbies. Most of them "don't have time" because they don't make time. MAKE TIME for the shit you give a fuck about.

I think all this can be TL:DR'd into "Figure out what you give a fuck about - then give a fuck about it. Then stop giving a fuck about the things that you don't give a fuck about."

My problem with cynicism was that I cared too much, about too much, and the disappointment made me hard of heart. By focusing on causes I truly find worthwhile, and my loves and hobbies, I have been able to find meaning in what I do and become less cynical about my life and place in the universe (that is, an insignificant speck).

I've held myself to a high (really high) standard where I'll probably never be good enough for myself. It's a self-destructive behavior but I've got a lot better at some things over the years, and completely burnt out of others because of it...

Hi. Hey. I know that feel.

It's really hard to break these standards because these standards are pushing for something "good." Something even the most sane person would agree is a good goal; self-improvement, measurable quantifiable real-world success. These standards are simply about bettering yourself. And you're always trying to better yourself. If you taught yourself it was okay to be the way you are - if you learned that it was okay not to hate yourself - then you'd be teaching yourself something bad. You'd be teaching yourself that you don't need to improve. Maybe you are afraid that if you don't hold yourself to these standards, you will become a fat cat, allow yourself to rest on your laurels, and stop growing. And, also, because you hate yourself right now, you cannot stand the idea of accepting who you are, or resting on your laurels, or being lazy. You cannot stand, probably, the idea of self-acceptance. Why would you ever accept yourself? You feel like you can see so plainly all these areas that need fixing. If you "accepted" yourself maybe you feel that you would really just be "letting yourself go."

I really, really know that feel. In effect, the fear of being mediocre, or being content with mediocrity, encourages you to hold on to those ideals even more strongly, and also (I've found) discourages one from seeking mental help for those issues. After all, they are behaviors that you want. If you get therapy and "fix" yourself, you'll stop becoming a better person. You'll become lazy. Self-hate may be a key factor, or feel like a key factor, for your motivation. If you stop hating yourself, how will you ever push yourself to succeed? What lever will you use? Your carrot and whip will disappear.

If you are happy with yourself as you are now, why would you ever want to improve yourself? And if you want to improve yourself, how can you be happy with yourself?

Shoot me down now if that doesn't sound familiar. If that is what you feel, trust me, I've been on that train several times, and I understand.

Go to therapy for this. You will not be able to fix this on your own. I have found that sometimes mental health problems cause the mind to get into such a jumbled warped pattern that while you may be aware of the mental health issues, they justify themselves mentally. I still, perhaps clearly judging by my response to this post, struggle with "good enough" and high standards.

The thing is that in the long run you can be happy with yourself and still want to improve. It sounds crazy, I know, (and that's not sarcastic) but you can actually be at peace with yourself. You don't have to abandon your high standards if you want. You just have to kill the rabid, driving, rat-like force that's currently spinning the wheel of your brain and making you go.

I hope this helps and is accurate because otherwise I've just gone and been vain and made this more about me than you. I don't want to do that. I want you to be happy. I just saw a small part of this that resonated a LOT with me and that I thought might make you particularly resistant to therapy...And I wanted to say. Get thine ass to therapy. Go to six different therapists if you want. Don't stop til you find one who you really, really like. And keep trying. Even if sometimes you don't really want to improve. Even if sometimes you bring 0 to therapy. Keep trying.

<deep sigh>

I've read like eight books(edit: I wrote this, then wrote what follows - the actual number is over 20). Israel is kind of the distillation of conflict and hegemony going back to the Crusades. As such, you kind of need to form your own opinion. I can give you my mileposts; you may or may not come to the same conclusions.

1) The Jews are kicked out of Palestine by the Babylonians in the Diaspora (A)

2) A return to Israel becomes ingrained in the basic prayers of the Jews (A)(B)

3) Landless, the Jews wander afield. Many end up in Europe, where they are treated like outcasts and forbidden from working the land, thereby shoving them into occupations like tailoring and moneylending (A)(C)

4) The Crusades expose Europeans to the current occupants and conflicts of Palestine, restructuring religious and cultural comprehension of Europeans as "our Jews" and the Moors as "their Jews" (A)

5) Persecution of Jews continues in Continental Europe with the expulsion of the Moors and persecution of the Sephards in Spain, driving more Jews to England (A)

6) England, eager to legitimize Anglicanism, embraces the Old Testament and all things Jewish (except Jews, who still can't own land) as a refutation of all things Catholic, leading to the Puritan tradition of naming white kids after biblical Jews (A).

7) The Enlightenment and Renaissance re-align Europe along the concept of boundaries and nationalism rather than city-states and tribalism, further alienating and disenfranchising the Jews (D)

8) English purges drive the Puritans to the United States, where "jewishness" as a biblical conceit remains worshipped but actual Jews remain reviled (A)

9) As colonization and empire flourish, so does materialism and territorialism thereby raising the hate levels against Jews, culminating in the Dreyfus Affair, in which a French army captain is tried for treason essentially for being Jewish (A)(B)(C)(D)

10) The Dreyfus Affair prompts another diaspora of European Jews to England, where Theodore Herzl and others come up Zionism not as an approach to trample the rights of Palestinians, but as a way to keep from going extinct in the face of 2000 years of persecution and extermination (A)(B)(D)

11) The outbreak of WWI and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire ("The sick man of Europe") leads to a global reapportionment of territory in which the Middle East is carved up willy-nilly for Western empires, particularly France and England (D)(E)

12) Sensing an in, Theodore Hertzl petitions Lord Balfour for a chunk of land to move all the Jews to so they don't get exterminated by French, Russian, German, Spanish and English pogroms. Balfour offers Uganda. Hertzl says "yay" everyone else says "Uganda?" (A)(D)(E)

13) Baron Rothschild (AKA the richest, Jewishest rich Jew in the history of rich Jews) appeals to Balfour for Palestine, rather than Uganda, and the British Empire essentially signs a letter of intent saying "We don't have a particular problem with that, but we're not going to support it, really, you're on your own, fuckers." Europe and the European Middle East collectively LOSE THEIR SHIT (A)(B)(C)(D)(E)(F)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration#mediaviewer/File:Balfour_portrait_and_declaration.JPG

14) With a little bit of money and not a lot of support, a hard-core Zionists buy up a couple hundred acres in Jaffa that will become Tel Aviv. The Arabs, who never got the "territory not tribe" memo (D) say "fuck this noise" and begin terrorism and warfare with material support from the French (E)(F)

(non-sequitor about Jewish persecution in Tsarist Russia goes here - this is how my great grandfather Mordechai went from being a jeweler in Moscow to being a greengrocer in Manhattan)

15) The world spirals into a nasty depression wherein everyone loses all their money. The Germans, loath to blame their misfortunes on their war of aggression against Belgium and France, blame it on war reparations they never actually paid and on those filthy Jews, who have always been handy, and who are hated by the Spanish, French, Italians and the entirety of the former Hapsburg Empire (your 6th grade history teacher)

16) BAD THINGS HAPPEN brought to you by The History channel

17) The United States, noticing that Europe has twice driven the world to war over old grudges and recognizing that oil is the future, proceeds to ass England out of Saudi Arabia for ever in exchange for all the oil they can drink, all the guns they can sell, and a "don't ask, don't tell" policy towards those filthy Jews across the peninsula (C)(F)(G)(H)

17) Hitler's Bunker etc V-E Day and kissing in the streets. Meanwhile, France is in ruins, Belgium is in ruins, Germany is in ruins, Poland is in ruins, Italy is in ruins, England is broke as fuck and the United States is ascendant. All of the countries listed aside from the United States enact policies and procedures that essentially say "we don't care that this was your house, we don't care that this was your job, we don't care that your family was gassed at Dachau this is ours now and you should fuck off, you filthy Jew" (C - Seriously - the entire last chapter of C is a solid, documented, footnoted argument that while the Germans were the ones that actually carried out the Holocaust most every country in Europe was thinking about it, was aligned with its principles, and was pretty damn happy to have those filthy Jews gone).

18) Tel Aviv is now one hope in a blasted hellscape of holocaust survivalism and a Europe that just doesn't give a fuck about the Jews. Everybody bolts for "Israel." The British hate this because, completely assed out of Saudi Arabia, Iran and Palestine are all they have for oil that they desperately need. (B)(C)(D)(F)

19) Now at odds over how to run the world, England sidles up to Iran, France sidles up to Egypt and the United States sidles up to Saudi Arabia. Not surprisingly, half of the intelligence apparatus of Europe ends up in Israel. (C)(H)(I)

20) Irate over the rapacious contracts enjoyed by the Anglo Iranian Oil Company (AOIC, aka BP), Mohammed Mossadegh is swept to power. England, thoroughly assed out of oil, attempts to overthrow Mossadegh and enlists US help. The US somehow manages to fuck up in such a way that the English coup attempt fails but another all-American attempt a week later succeeds, thereby installing Mohammed Zair Shah, an American puppet, in the Peacock throne. US interests now control Saudi Arabian and Iranian crude 100%, thereby converting England to a vassal state of the United States (C)(G)(H)(I)(J)

21) Gamal Abdel Nasser decides to dam the Aswan in Egypt. England and the US offer to help. Nasser decides Non-Alignment is the way to go and gets Soviet aid as well. England and the US withdraw in a huff. Nasser nationalizes the dam, thereby evaporating large swaths of European investment. England and France enlist Israeli intelligence to help them invade Egypt. The United States, not consulted on the adventure and knee-deep in a proxy war with the Soviet Union in Korea, pins all three country's ears back but especially Israel. Israel gains material support from the United States and intelligence exchanges. (C)(I)

22) (SPECULATION AHEAD) The United States, just to put Israel in its place, mentions nothing about the massed troops plainly visible via satellite reconaissance that led to the Yom Kippur War. Israel faces an existential crisis and gains land; the Arab world is humiliated, and the only remaining power in the Middle East that isn't on the US payroll is pushed back. (B)

23) Israel becomes even more of a rallying point/thorn in the side of Middle East countries. Nasser is assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood, the great-grandfather of Al Qaeda, the PLO, Hamas and every other faction in the Middle East. Yasser Arafat, an Egyptian, re-invents himself as "Palestinian" to put a human face on the Arab-Israeli conflict. (B)(D)

24) Stansfield Turner, DCI, responds to Watergate revelations by conducting the Halloween Massacre at the CIA, whereby the agency essentially purged its abilties of HUMINT (HUMan INTelligence) in favor of ELINT (ELectronic INTelligence) and IMINT (IMaging INTelligence). As part of this process, the United States loses the ability to predict the fall of the Shah and rise of the Ayatollah, thereby turning over the 2nd-largest military and arsenal over to Islamic extremists with a real axe to grind against the US. (G)(H)(I)(K)(L)(M)(N)(O)

25) Iran, fully recognizing that the CIA is effectively its only oppositional power in the Middle East, begins a Soviet-style proxy battle against the CIA and, therefore Israel, its paid-in-full puppet and the most obvious thorn in the side of Islam via Hamas and Hezbollah. IT'S SUPER-EFFECTIVE. Their greatest success, aside from the Marine barracks bombings and utter chaos enjoyed by the Middle East at large, is kidnapping and murdering William Francis Buckley, the legit CIA station chief for, like, The Middle East. (I)(L)(M)(N)(O)

26) The CIA begins a perpetual hard-on for anything related to annihilation of the regime in Iran. This includes arming and encouraging Iraq in a bloody and pointless war that kills millions. France, never one to miss a beat, sells Iraq mustard gas. Meanwhile half the oil in the Middle East is no longer American so the United States doubles down in Saudi Arabia where, by the way, Wahabism is sweeping the ruling class. IMPORTANT TO NOTE: Saudi Arabia is run basically by the Kardashians. It’s not really a country. It’s about 80 dudes directly related to Ibn Saud that do what they want. (F)(G)(H)(I)(K)(L)(M)(N)(O)

27) So here we are: Saudi Arabia wants Israel annihilated because Jews. Iran wants to fuck with Israel because CIA. Iraq fired Scuds at Israel because CIA. The CIA relies entirely on Israel because William Buckley. And when Europe and Russia completely assed the Jews out of their homes, the United States has been providing Israel with material aid since WWII. And, by the way, a lot of them emigrated to the United States. (A-O)

TL:DR: Israel is where Europe finally got to cast all its jews. Israel is the most democratic and American-friendly state left in the Middle East, so we rely on them for intelligence and ground support in proxy warfare. Israel, in turn, takes the brunt of Islamic aggression against the West because not only are they an obvious example of Americanism, but they are literally the boots on the ground for a clash of ideas going back to the Enlightenment and a clash of colonization going back to the Crusades.

In my opinion? The Palestinians will be wiped out. It’s just a matter of time. They’re Native Arabians on the Reservation and eventually the plague blankets will catch up with them. But it isn’t the “Israelis” that started this.

It’s us.

And that’s why there are no simple answers.

(PS I could throw more books at this)

________________________________________________________________________________

(A) Bible and Sword: England and Palestine from the Bronze Age to Balfour by Barbara Tuchman

(B) The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, The West, and the Future of the Holy City by Dore Gold

(C) Postwar: A History of Europe since 1945

(D) How To Win A Cosmic War: Confronting Radical Religions by Reza Aslan

(E) Paris 1919: Six Months that Changed the World by Margaret McMillan

(F) Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism by Dore Gold

(G) Sleeping with the Devil: How Washington Sold our Soul for Saudi Crude by Robert Baer

(H) Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq by Stephen Kinzer

(I) Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA by Tim Wiener

(J) All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror by Stephen Kinzer

(K) RESET: Iran, Turkey and America's Future by Stephen Kinzer

(L) Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA in Afghanistan from the Soviet Invasion to September 10 2001 by Steve Coll

(M) Charlie Wilson's War:blah blah blah super long subtitle by George Crile

(N) Ghost: Confessions of a Counterterrorism Agent by Fred Burton

(O) See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism by Robert Baer