Why are we supporting Israel?

[ravells]

Hardly

Nukes? Who said anything about Isreal using Nukes? Certainly wasnt mentioned in my post.
Isreal has always maintained it would not be the first in the region to use nukes. So I highly doubt they would have in this case.

For one reason they would have had to have known that no way would the US agree to it and if they had tried to on their own the US would have had no choice but to blow them out of the sky before they reached their targets or risk a MUCH wider conflict then just the alliance falling apart

Re Nukes: Quite right, Drediok, I'm sorry, I must have misread your post (the result of me posting late at night and bieng a bit tipsy!).

I still have my doubts about whether Israel didn't do anything during Gulf War 1 because it was in Israel's interest rather than the US (or UN interest). I believe it was more through self interest. My memory fades, but at the time wern't the rest of the world virtually begging Israel not to retaliate? To measure Israel's commitment to US interests, we need some sort of situation where Israel carries out an act which does not further Israeli interests but which does further US interests. I can't think of one, although that's probably through a lack of knowledge.

Ravs

[ravells]

Originally posted by OIO
ravells.... if britain had needed help against argentina,  then the british had bigger problems than having to face argentina dont you think?

oth, did britain ASK for help in the falklands? I think not. See above paragraph.


Why is the US supporting Israel?

Forget all the religious and social and economical reasons you can dream up.

Just look at a map of the middle east. If the answer doesnt pop out and slap you then perhaps you should take a hardcover atlas and hit yourself in the head with it until it sinks in.

Um... not sure what you are saying here, OIO.

I cannot believe that Britain did not ask for help (albeit behind closed doors) from the US during the Falklands - Maggie was virtually Regan's second wife.  And as I said, we did receive help...certainly Satellite information and as Shaden said, AIM 9L missiles.

I think you are saying in your second paragraph that Israel occupies some sort of Geographical strongpoint which assists America...perhaps true in the past, but now with Aircraft carriers which can carry planes that wipe out any opposion anywhere in the world, does Israel still occupy a geographical position of importance? As I recall, during GW1 and 2 (I may be wrong) the US did not base any aircraft in Israel, but in Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

Or else I'm missing your point entirely.

Ravs

[AVRO1]

Originally posted by BGBMAW
Give the border countries 24 hours notice you are going to Nuke the country side..

Great way to irradiate your population too.

[-dead-]

Originally posted by Capt. Pork
There are fewer than 6 million jews in the US, and as Storch mentioned, a good deal of them are liberal.

I guess the remaining 3-3.5 million must be pulling some serious strings to bend a nation of over a quarter billion to their evil conservative will.

Actually I found it interesting precisely because the general US political stereotype for the "Jewish vote" is that it is for the most part a liberal vote. So how come there are so many Jewish neo-cons? Is the stereotype perhaps wrong? Is the "Jewish vote" actually right-wing?

Given that the US has a population of 290 million and - according to you - there are less than 6 million Jewish Americans, a good deal of whom are liberals - why is the number of Jewish neo-cons so disproportionate? If we assume 3 million of the US population are right wing Jewish Americans, that represents only about 1% of the US population. All things being equal, one would therefore expect a very low percentage of neo-cons to be Jewish American - based on the "50% of voters are right wing" assumption we made before.

As it is, according to this list, the percentage is up at past 50%. Which is a statistical anomaly. Why? What's the big attraction of being a neo-con to Jewish Americans? Is it because neo-cons are pro-Israel - thus attracting the Jewish American right-wingers? Or are the neo-cons pro-Israel as a result of their group having so many Jewish Americans? It's a bit of a chicken/egg question.

As to a minority influencing a nation of 290 million - well in some ways it's not really a far-fetched conspiracy theory - pretty much all governments work on that principle. The US government itself is always a minority, and has the power (given a majority in Congress/Senate) to bend a nation of 290 million to their will for 4 years. And every government relies on policy "think tanks" and "experts".

Whether the neo-cons represent the policy shapers of the current government or not is a moot point, but Rumsfeld, Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith and Bolton are all on the list, so there's certainly some influence brought to bear.

That said, I don't subsribe to any evil zionist conspiracy theory - but I do find it odd that a group touted as being traditionally liberal and making up 2% of the US populace should make up over 50% of a list of the leading lights in the far-right.

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Staga
Well Hortlund; you attacked against a messenger once again because you couldn't say anything else. Life sucks eh ??

What the hell are you talking about?

[BGBMAW]

Avro......we do have small nukes...hell use Fuel Vapor bombs...just kill alot of them

[culero]

Originally posted by Pei
One point to note is that just because a state may not have historically existed doesn't reduce the right of the people to self determination (and the formation of thier own state). snip

Oh, aye, absolutely. I never meant to imply otherwise when I brought that up. I agree that in order for all this to be settled peacefully and honestly, the Palestinians must be accomodated.

The lack of a pre-existing state is relevant, however, when people talk about Israel somehow being guilty of illegal occupation.

culero

[OIO]

"I cannot believe that Britain did not ask for help (albeit behind closed doors) from the US during the Falklands - Maggie was virtually Regan's second wife.  And as I said, we did receive help...certainly Satellite information and as Shaden said, AIM 9L missiles."

I meant help as in combat forces. but yeah, i'd agree intel wouldve been shared. note the . i was just being a wiseass  

"I think you are saying in your second paragraph that Israel occupies some sort of Geographical strongpoint which assists America...perhaps true in the past, but now with Aircraft carriers which can carry planes that wipe out any opposion anywhere in the world, does Israel still occupy a geographical position of importance? As I recall, during GW1 and 2 (I may be wrong) the US did not base any aircraft in Israel, but in Turkey and Saudi Arabia."

And between Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia, which would you say is a reliable ally?

And im not reffering to which nation is honorable or dependable or which is more amiable to your ideology... Its a case of which nation is in no position of turning against your interests at any given time.  The middle east is extremely important because of one thing: oil.

Israel is practically next door the biggest source of it. If there was no Israel, what kind of influence would the US, who is literally addicted to 'black gold',  have over those nations? Over the oil supply? Just imagine there was no israel... one little disagreement between any of the oil producing nations and the US could result in an oil embargo that could cause a lot of problems for a superpower nation (as it did last century when the US was embargo'd).

Aircraft carriers are nice... but having an established beach head (israel) is better.

And who can make a better ally to protect such important assets than one that cannot turn against you? Israel is capable of kicking the arabs for a good while, but they cannot survive a prolonged conflict.


Its all a matter of self-interest. Simple as that.

[ravells]

And between Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia, which would you say is a reliable ally?  

Probably Turkey first (when they join Nato) then Saudi and then Israel.

Why? Because the Turks want to be Europeans very much, the Saudi's are in debt to their eyeballs and Israel are just looking after Israel.

I just cannot see Israel allowing the US to fly planes from there if it meant a bigger problem for Israel after the US left. The Israelis are a very practical people and they know that at the end of the day, they are on their own and that other nations can be fickle.

Ravs

[OIO]

"Why? Because the Turks want to be Europeans very much, the Saudi's are in debt to their eyeballs and Israel are just looking after Israel."

The best ally is the one thats in no position to go against you. Of the above which of the 3 has been literally fighting for its own survival as a nation...and which of the 3 relies on the US FOR its survival?
 

"I just cannot see Israel allowing the US to fly planes from there if it meant a bigger problem for Israel after the US left. The Israelis are a very practical people and they know that at the end of the day, they are on their own and that other nations can be fickle."

Which is exactly why the US pocketed the Saudis to be their ground staging area for the gulf wars. Israel cannot stand alone in the long run, and they know it, the US knows it. Both the US and Israel have it in their own best self interest to support each other. Israel gets the protection of a superpower and the US gets the benefit of having a beach head in a very critical region...and the US would be really stupid to risk their 'queen' Israel to take out an opposing pawn (Iraq/Taliban) when they can just a lesser piece (Saudi) to get the job done.

self-interest.

[ravells]

But....but...Israel has never danced to the US tune. Whereas the Saudis and the Turks have. We are at a stage today when if your very survival is at stake as Israel then so many variables are going to come into play that it's impossible to determine the outcome.

Whereas with Saudi and Turkey it's easier: The Saudi Royal family owe the US a TON of money. The Turkish people want to be part of the EU and NATO.

I see the point you're making, but it's an 'Armageddon point'. And if people started invading Israel and were suceeding then we're all probably fu**ed.

I like your chess analogy and I can really see what you're saying, but I think, in the end, Israel will prove to be a poisoned chalice to the US. The difficulty being that the US cannot look at the Israeli problem objectively. If they could, the place wouldn't be the powder keg it is today.

To use the chess analogy again, perhaps the US should sacrifice her queen and push a pawn (in the form of Turkey) to the 8th Rank and queen it instead.

The Turks would know the US would only want it as a staging post in return for aid and it would be an 'arms length' relationship.

Ravs

[OIO]

"But....but...Israel has never danced to the US tune"

I never said Israel was a puppet that did everything the US told them. But when push comes to shove that is what will happen. Case in point: Israel did not retaliate as Hussein's scuds fell on them. To have done otherwise wouldve been disastrous to both.

"Whereas with Saudi and Turkey it's easier: The Saudi Royal family owe the US a TON of money. The Turkish people want to be part of the EU and NATO. "

Money and Want dont guarantee that Saudi and Turkey will go along with what the US wants. They are both wide open to influence from OTHER nations, especially the European powers and other Arab nations..whereas Israel only really has to worry about influencing the US.

When push comes to shove, Turkey and Saudi Arabia would be very unreliable 'allies'.

And thats why the US supports Israel (the topic at hand) imo.

[ravells]

Well then. She's a very expensive queen.

So far I think that Israel has been an unreliable ally to the U.S.

Thing about Israel is that she can't be bought.

Ravs.

[OIO]

"Well then. She's a very expensive queen."

Not as expensive as the alternative... keeping a fleet or 2 of nuclear carriers  parked in a certain area of the world... troops, etc...

"So far I think that Israel has been an unreliable ally to the U.S."

I think Israel has been a very reliable ally. Israel has survived. That is the only thing the US needs (again, imo). The beach head remains secure. They even took those scud hits in the first gulf war and didnt fight back. If they had their arab neighbors wouldve come a-screaming down while the bumbling UN debated itself to death and issued toothless resolutions.

"Thing about Israel is that she can't be bought."

Why buy the queen when you're her only lifeline? What you think France or Germany will run to help Israel? Or that the UK has enough military capability to help them if crap hits the fan? UN/NATO? *cough*

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by bozon
It already happened in Israel.
"Armegeddon" is a deformation of the Hebrew "Har Megido" or in english "Megido mountain".
It's a hill a little west of Jenin (inside 1967 border) inwhich a great battle was fought against the Romans during the great revult. Many people belived that this comming battle is the "light vs. darkness" battle that is before the comming of the Messiah.
Guess what? they "light" side lost and the Messiah missed the party.

Some nice ruins there today.

Bozon

Wow....thanks, Bozon