Talk:Suez Crisis

1. Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2014

   Under the header 'Frustration of British aims' it says in the first sentence of the fourth paragraph 'After the ..., Eden become consumed with an obsessional hatred for Nasser,'. This should be 'After the ..., Eden became consumed with an obsessional hatred for Nasser,'

   Balladeertje (talk) 20:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

   Done Stickee (talk) 00:08, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

   Edit Request -- lede

   The following is {dubious} unless more sources can be found, as the only citation is ONE historian , not any sort of Academic Consensus nor even 2 or more (plural) historians, as the editor who added this tries to make it sound: "Historians have studied Britain's failure and conclude the crisis "signified the end of Great Britain's role as one of the world's major powers".[19]" ¬¬¬¬

   Historical dictionaries are designed to summarize the consensus of the scholars. Lots of scholars emphasize the importance of the Suez crisis. For example look at these books: Keith Kyle, The Suez Crisis: Britain’s End of Empire (2002); Cameron Watt, Succeeding John Bull: America in Britain's Place (1984). Peden in 2012 states, "The Suez crisis is widely believed to have contributed significantly to Britain's decline as a world power." in "Suez and Britain's decline as a world power" Historical Journal Dec 2012, pp 1073-1096. David French in 2013 stated that "The consensus is that [Defence Minister] Sandys [in the months after Suez] was a prime mover in bringing about a contraction of Britain's military capabilities." Diplomacy & Statecraft March 2013, pp 41-58. Rjensen (talk) 19:53, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

   Here it Wikipedia, the job of the editors is to summarize what the reliable published secondary sources have to say, whether we agree with them or not. In my opinion, Great Britain in 1955 was indeed a major power in the Middle East, but was no longer so two years later. Rjensen (talk) 21:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

   Hardly. The UK had already agreed to withdraw from Egypt in 1954. (HeddieLemarr (talk) 11:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC))

   Why did the Americans object to Suez?

   The same US administration had already supported colonialism in Korea and Iran. (LanceHendrickson (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2015 (UTC))

   The US fought a war to expel the colonial power (Japan) from Korea. US worked hard to make sure the Soviets left Iran in 1946. American policy encouraged decolonization in the British and French empires, and strongly opposed any use of military force to reimpose control by the former colonial powers. The Americans sympathize with the independence movement, which echoed its own independence movement in 1776. Rjensen (talk) 00:35, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

   So why did they fight a colonialist war in Korea until 1953, and reinstate British colonialism in Iran? Also the Truman administration allowed the French to re-enter Vietnam after World War II. (LanceHendrickson (talk) 09:30, 4 February 2015 (UTC))

   That's an interesting point. Why did Eisenhower support British colonialism in Iran in 1953, yet oppose colonialism in Egypt in 1956? (HeddieLemarr (talk) 11:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC))