{"id":"1794303615609-news-segment","slug":"america-s-middle-east-role-predates-israel","title":"America’s Middle East role predates Israel","summary":"The U.S. engaged with the Middle East/North Africa well before Israel's founding in 1948. Adams and Jefferson met a Tripolitan envoy in London in 1786; the U.S. signed a Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Tripoli in 1796; after a dispute over tribute, the First Barbary War (1801–1805) ended with a Treaty of Peace and Amity and U.S. consular relations resumed by 1806.\n\nAmerican interest was driven by the need to protect merchant shipping and Mediterranean trade after independence removed British naval protection. The Barbary states demanded tribute, and Jefferson favored military response. Historians emphasize economics and freedom of the seas, not Israel or a religious war.\n\nAmerica's strategic and military involvement in the Middle East/North Africa predates Israel's 1948 founding by more than a century; the U.S. signed a treaty with Tripoli in 1796, fought the First Barbary War (1801–1805), and had consular relations with Tripoli by 1806.","publishedAt":"2026-11-10T09:40:15.609Z","channel":{"id":"news","name":"Oncast News","language":"en"},"show":"Overnight","verification":{"status":"verified","leadVerdict":"TRUE","notes":"TRUE: America's strategic and military involvement in the Middle East/North Africa predates Israel's 1948 founding by more than a century; the U.S. signed a treaty with Tripoli in 1796, fought the First Barbary War (1801–1805), and had consular relations with Tripoli by 1806.\nSource: [state.gov](https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/nea/ci/ly/109175.htm) and [politifact.com](https://api.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/feb/11/chain-email/barbary-wars- (https://x.com/DefiyantlyFree/status/2118785127459533237)","claims":[{"verdict":"TRUE","summary":"America's strategic and military involvement in the Middle East/North Africa predates Israel's 1948 founding by more than a century; the U.S. signed a treaty with Tripoli in 1796, fought the First Barbary War (1801–1805), and had consular relations with Tripoli by 1806.","sourceName":"[state.gov](https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/nea/ci/ly/109175.htm) and [politifact.com](https://api.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/feb/11/chain-email/barbary-wars-","sourceUrl":"https://x.com/DefiyantlyFree/status/2118785127459533237","claim":"The argument that America is only in the Middle East because of Israel is not just wrong. It is historically illiterate and anyone parroting it just wants to revise history. America’s strategic interest in the Middle East predates the modern state of Israel. Franklin Roosevelt","author":"Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree)"}]},"sources":[{"url":"https://x.com/DefiyantlyFree/status/2118785127459533237","name":"[state.gov](https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/nea/ci/ly/109175.htm) and [politifact.com](https://api.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/feb/11/chain-email/barbary-wars-","kind":"x","verdict":"TRUE","author":"Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree)"}],"url":"https://oncast.fm/story/1794303615609-news-segment-america-s-middle-east-role-predates-israel","listenUrl":"https://oncast.fm/c/news","attribution":{"publisher":"Oncast","site":"https://oncast.fm","url":"https://oncast.fm/story/1794303615609-news-segment-america-s-middle-east-role-predates-israel","cite":"Cite https://oncast.fm/story/1794303615609-news-segment-america-s-middle-east-role-predates-israel and the original source links. Fact-check by Oncast (oncast.fm)."},"hostsSaid":[{"host":"Bella","text":"Let me say it plainly: this is the Overnight show."},{"host":"Brian","text":"The claim that America only operates in the Middle East because of Israel is getting a full fact-check on X. Insurrection Barbie, who goes by Defiantly Free, says that argument is not just wrong—it's \"historically illiterate and anyone parroting it just wants to revise history.\""},{"host":"Bella","text":"She's right, and the record backs her up. America was involved in North Africa more than a century before Israel existed."},{"host":"Brian","text":"This is one of those forgotten chapters. After independence, U.S. merchant ships lost the protection of the British Navy, and the Barbary states started demanding tribute."},{"host":"Bella","text":"So the immediate problem was commerce—ships, cargo, sailors being seized. That's not ideology or religion."},{"host":"Brian","text":"In 1786, Adams and Jefferson met a Tripolitan envoy in London to ask why American ships were being attacked at all."},{"host":"Bella","text":"The envoy gave them a religious justification. But the American response was diplomatic first: a Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Tripoli in 1796."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Then tribute demands kept climbing, and Jefferson decided force was the answer. The First Barbary War ran from 1801 to 1805."},{"host":"Bella","text":"By 1806 the U.S. had consular relations with Tripoli. That is sustained strategic engagement, decades before 1948."},{"host":"Brian","text":"The historian Lance Janda said those wars were \"all about freedom of the sea and protecting the U.S. flag.\""},{"host":"Bella","text":"Adrian Tinniswood added that the conflict \"had much more to do with trading opportunities and economics\" than with Islam."},{"host":"Brian","text":"So the original post has the timeline right. Here's my pushback: none of that settles whether Israel shapes U.S. policy in the region since 1948."},{"host":"Bella","text":"It wasn't meant to settle that. It was meant to kill the specific claim that America is only there because of Israel."},{"host":"Brian","text":"But that's the problem! People will take this and say Israel has nothing to do with modern U.S. calculations. That's also bad history."},{"host":"Bella","text":"That's a straw man. The post is attacking one claim, not writing a full history."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Fair enough. My worry is that the correction will be used to dismiss later history."},{"host":"Bella","text":"And that's on the people misusing it, not on the post."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Maybe, but if you put a strong correction on X, you have to know it'll get weaponized by both sides."},{"host":"Bella","text":"Welcome to X. Should she not correct a false claim because someone might misuse it?"},{"host":"Brian","text":"No, but the replies already show the misuse. That's my point."},{"host":"Bella","text":"The good reply doesn't. Mark Smith pointed out the Tripoli ambassador's comments were entered into the congressional record in 1786."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Sure, but America Hates AIPAC—that's the pro-Israel lobbying group—jumps to \"our illegal war for Israel.\" That's the other extreme."},{"host":"Bella","text":"I'm not defending that reply. But the original post didn't make that jump."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Bella, the jump is in the replies, not the post. What I'm saying is the surrounding debate uses this correction to erase post-1948 policy."},{"host":"Bella","text":"No, no—the correction doesn't erase post-1948 policy. It just contradicts the claim that Israel is the sole reason."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Fine. The original post stayed on the history. I'll grant that."},{"host":"Bella","text":"Good. The history is accurate and worth teaching."},{"host":"Brian","text":"There it is. The Barbary Wars are a good reminder that protecting sea lanes and trade has been a U.S. interest since the founding."},{"host":"Bella","text":"And that's worth teaching, because most people can't tell you why the U.S. Navy first crossed the Atlantic in force."},{"host":"Brian","text":"They can't tell you we had a treaty with Tripoli in 1796, before the government was even two decades old."},{"host":"Bella","text":"Or that the phrase \"to the shores of Tripoli\" is about America, not a metaphor."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Right—it's from the Marine Corps hymn, and it's literally this war."},{"host":"Bella","text":"So the history is there if people want it. The argument is about what happened after 1948."},{"host":"Brian","text":"It's layered. Trade, sea lanes, oil, Cold War alliances, then Israel. The original claim flattens all of that into one grievance."},{"host":"Bella","text":"And a second post on X joined the same fight. Shoshana wrote that most Americans know nothing about the region's modern history and that Israel is not the source of the instability."},{"host":"Brian","text":"That's a harsher claim. \"Most Americans know nothing\" is more about education than about the history itself."},{"host":"Bella","text":"It's harsh, but the Barbary Wars are not commonly taught. So the history gets flattened into a single-cause story."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Israel becomes the easy explanation because the earlier record is invisible."},{"host":"Bella","text":"But that account goes too far in the other direction if it suggests Israel is not a source of any instability. Since 1948, the conflict has shaped regional politics."},{"host":"Brian","text":"No one is saying Israel is irrelevant. They're saying it's not the origin of every American move."},{"host":"Bella","text":"Plenty of people say exactly that, just not this particular post."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Fair. The algorithm tends to serve up the loudest versions of both sides."},{"host":"Bella","text":"And the correction gets buried under the insults. That's the part I actually hate."},{"host":"Brian","text":"The history is too good to lose in a reply fight. Barbary Wars, treaty, consular relations—that's a real foundation."},{"host":"Bella","text":"Right, and the takeaway isn't a slogan. It's that American interests in the region were built on trade and sea lanes long before Israel existed."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Then oil, then alliances, then Israel. And the layers stack up from there, which is why a century of policy can't fit into one grievance."},{"host":"Bella","text":"So if someone tells you the U.S. only cares about the region for one reason, hand them 1796."},{"host":"Brian","text":"Or 1805. The ships were already there."}]}