Author Topic: Cutting Aid to Israel (Read 5241 times)

Toad · « **Reply #105 on:** June 24, 2004, 12:05:29 PM »

Who determines the US goals in such a case?

Congress? The JCS? The President? The electorate?

I'd have to say Carter called the shots on this one. Anyone anywhere have any documentation from him about his goals for the Camp David Accords?

Pongo · « **Reply #106 on:** June 24, 2004, 12:16:58 PM »

I find this typical of debate with you lately Toad. You take an unqualified compliment and twist it into some kind of insult to the US.
You seem to have a great deal of dificulty accepting that the US (Carter included) do what is in thier countries own interest. Why should that be held against the US? I dont hold it agianst them. In this situation the US benifited greatly. This was a big chink out of the soviet armour that contributed to thier eventual collapse.

If you want to talk about things that Carter did that were of no real benifit to the US but only done for reasons of fairness. Look at Panama.

Only the two Bush presidents since Vietnam seem to do things internationaly that are not in the intrests of the US as a whole. Certainly Reagan..ruthless as any president ever. Was ruthless in persuing the goals of his country. Not his personal goals at the expense of his country.

Sikboy · « **Reply #107 on:** June 24, 2004, 12:28:16 PM »

Who determines the goals? Why Zbigniew Brzazinski of course

Of course Mr. Brzazinski wasn't the architecht of Camp David, but he is representative of the multiple inputs which the administration operated under. I believe those in his camp would have pushed for this plan on the basis of poaching Soviet clients alone, without regard for stopping the violence.

But of course, there were other influences, but I don't think that any of them can just be wiped away with any ease.

-Sik

Flyboy · « **Reply #108 on:** June 24, 2004, 12:48:34 PM »

Hi bluedog

im 17 now, will be 18 in november.
in israel every man and woman that come to the age of 18 has to join the army.

men have a 3year minimum and women 2years.

Toad · « **Reply #109 on:** June 24, 2004, 12:51:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pongo
Ihave a great deal of dificulty accepting that

Actually, what I have a great deal of difficulty accepting is that you have any basis whatsoever for assigning equality to the two "intentions" of the US. Well, any basis other than opinion.

For example, Egypt clearly showed that it could be "bought"; money was what got the deal done.

So tell me why the US didn't just forget the peace initiative and buy them out of the Soviet orbit? Why bother getting the Israelis in on it at all.

No matter what we do in the US some will find a way to try and tarnish it, blemish it, cheapen it or disdain it. The past "Marshall Plan" threads are typical. Of course, they never explain why we didn't just spend the money here.

You ever hear of the "Friendship Train" started by Drew Pearson? What ulterior motives did we have there, eh?

Sikboy · « **Reply #110 on:** June 24, 2004, 12:58:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad

For example, Egypt clearly showed that it could be "bought"; money was what got the deal done.

So tell me why the US didn't just forget the peace initiative and buy them out of the Soviet orbit? Why bother getting the Israelis in on it at all.

Why drop the peace initiative, when you can have both? Two for the price of one?

I can't speak for our Canadian friend here, but I'm comfortable that I have not tarnished, cheapened or otherwise blemished the Camp David Accords. Brzezenski is a hero of mine.

-Sik

Toad · « **Reply #111 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:00:23 PM »

Because you probably could have got it "wholesale" if you left the "make kissy-kissy with the Israelis" out of it. Far, far cheaper I think.

Preon1 · « **Reply #112 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:00:56 PM »

Sikboy · « **Reply #113 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:04:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Because you probably could have got it "wholesale" if you left the "make kissy-kissy with the Israelis" out of it. Far, far cheaper I think.

I'm not sure I agree with that, but I certainly believe that getting both at once was easier and cheaper than trying to get them "ala cart." Not to mention the possible political fallout with Israel if we were to make unilateral offers to Egypt.

-Sik

Toad · « **Reply #114 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:08:55 PM »

Well, gee whiz, we already had Israel irrevocably anchored in our sphere of influence. Where else could they go?

So get Egypt on the cheap! Offer them the same weapons the Israelis were owning them with every time they went to war.

I mean, that's all that mattered right? Getting them in our orbit?

Sikboy · « **Reply #115 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:11:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad

I mean, that's all that mattered right? Getting them in our orbit?

I guess you're talking to someone else.

Never mind.

-Sik

Toad · « **Reply #116 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:22:01 PM »

Yeah, I'm trying out the other side's moccasins. Not pointed at you or anyone in particular.

Pongo · « **Reply #117 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:56:00 PM »

"No matter what we do in the US some will find a way to try and tarnish it, blemish it, cheapen it or disdain it."

If you cant accept that the Camp David accord was also a great diplomatic victory then where do we go? It has kept one of the largest most powerful arab nations in the US sphere through thick and thin for a quarter century. How is pointing that out an insult to the US?

I honestly cannot believe how narrow minded you have become.

You are not trying on any other moccasins. Your trying on the same jack boots you have allways worn..but you have put them on your head, in your mouth and up your butt to see if they work better there then they have served you on your feet.
But its the same old jack boots Toad.

Toad · « **Reply #118 on:** June 24, 2004, 02:02:09 PM »

Let me help you here.

What I find insulting is your hypothesis that the peace making between Israel and Egypt was of equal importance to drawing Egypt into our sphere of influence.

Why? Because historically, the MAP and additional aid was added towards the end of the negotiations at the insistence of the Egyptians.

Clearly, we started the negotiation with the primary intention of facilitating peace between these two.

As for jackboots, you're the one looking out your navel. It isn't this one instance either.

Pongo · « **Reply #119 on:** June 24, 2004, 03:14:02 PM »

Naw. Your blabbering cause its a facet of the aggreement that you had not considered. So your uncomfortable with it. But it is indeed self evident. It is indeed probably one of the major reasons why the accords have been so increadably successful. For 25 years those two countries were at war. For longer then that they havent been. Not a sniff. The US made it in everyones real interest to not be at war. Very well done. But it was in the USs interest as well.

Really you are being very very silly about this.