Recent Terrorism Shows Flaws in US Israel Policy

1. 60

   egivposted 14 years ago

   The unconditional support of Israel by the United States hurts US interests, as shown by the recent attack on the CIA by one who was motivated by Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.
   
   The United States gives Israel more money than any other nation in the world ($3 billion - $500 for every citizen), unconditionally, despite the fact that they are a wealthy, developed nation.
   
   I support Israel's right to exist, and have nothing against Jewish people. The problem is the unquestioning US support of Israeli policies that hurt our own interests. As long as Israel's harsh treatment of the Palestinians is unreservedly supported by the American government, terrorism will continue against the US and its supporters.
   
   Inform yourselves; it is not wrong or racist to criticize Israeli government policies, as it is not racist to criticize French or Chinese government policies. The US should treat Israel as they treat all other nations, no more and no less.
   
   http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn … index.html

   replyreport
   1. 68

      MikeNVposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      The correct amount of money given to Israel is $114 Billion since 1940.
      
      http://wrmea.org/component/content/arti … llion.html

      replyreport
2. 56

   Dame Scribeposted 14 years ago

   It takes two to fight

   replyreport
3. 72

   livewithrichardposted 14 years ago

   Maybe it's because Israel is the only country in the Middle East that resembles the US in its values and democracy.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      egivposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      When have democratic values ever played a role in who the United States does or does not support? If that were the case, why do we support monarchies like Saudi Arabia and overthrow democratically elected leaders, like the Mohammad Mossadeq in Iran in 1953, when they do not serve our interests?
      
      Besides, as far as I know, United States was never founded based on one religion, treating others as second-class citizens. We have freedom of religion and a very strong separation between church and state.
      
      I am not saying this is wrong or that I am opposed to it, only that it is not a legitimate argument to say that they deserve 3 billion a year and unquestioning support based only on this similarity in values.

      replyreport
      1. 58

         Unkotareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Don't you think they should?

         replyreport
         1. 60

            egivposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Are you so naive? Did you know that we supported Saddam in the 1980s? Sold him a whole bunch of weapons when it was in our own interest.

            replyreport
            1. 58

               Unkotareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I'm sorry, but I didn't see an answer there. Don't you think they should?

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  egivposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  You have a way of taking quotes out of context and changing the subject without addressing my arguments that is eerily similar to tksensei's. If you don't agree with what I say, that's fine, but address my argument instead of pushing the thread on a tangent that doesn't resemble the original subject.

                  replyreport
                  1. 58

                     Unkotareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     It's hard to know if I agree or disagree if you won't tell me what your position is. I have no idea about being "errily similar" to anyone, but I would just like you to tell me if you think democratic values should play a role in our foreign policy. I don't think it's an offensive or threatening question. You can just tell me what you really think.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        egivposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        I want the United States to destroy all guns, spend their money on education and helping the poor, and make an honest effort at world peace. I also want Coca Cola fountains and free back massages every Friday.
                        
                        Until then, I adhere to the political theory of realism, in which each nation acts in its own best interest. The United States has always acted in this way, and should continue by toning down support for Israel. Ready to respond to the actual topic now?

                        replyreport
                        1. 58

                           Unkotareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           Do you really think it would be a good idea for the US to destroy all its guns? That seems a bit reckless. And if you adhere to the principle of self interest, don't you think it's in the interest of the US to support an ally in a dangerous and important part of the world? I think it is.

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              egivposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              No, that's my point. Our uncritical support of Israel is one of (but not the only, of course) the principle reasons that motivates terrorism and anti-Americanism (the CIA bomber became motivated to extremism only after the war in Gaza last year).
                              
                              If the US pressured Israel to make a settlement on the Arab-Israeli crisis that was favorable to each party involved (Israel out of the Occupied Territories), we would be able to make allies in the Middle East (against the real threats that exist), instead of making the entire Middle East hate us.
                              
                              I'm not saying we shouldn't support Israel, but look where our policies that mimick Israeli needs have gotten us. A miserable disaster in Iraq, ever-stronger terrorist organizations, and a US hated by the entire world (even if Obama has made that a tad less).

                              replyreport
                              1. 58

                                 Unkotareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                 We have been "pressuring" Israel this way and that for decades. The issues of contention in that area of the world are not easily resolved or they would have been by now.

                                 replyreport
4. 58

   Unkotareposted 14 years ago

   I don't think it's a good idea to abandon our allies out of fear of terrorists. I think that is exactly the opposite of what principle and practicality suggests.

   replyreport
5. 58

   Unkotareposted 14 years ago

   So, do you think that if we turned our backs on Israel those states in the Middle East who are most opposed to us would suddenly think highly of us and become our friends? I think that those states fundamentally opposed to Israel on ideological grounds are also fundamentally opposed to the US for the same reason - because we share ideological principles with Israel and other allies. So abandoning a friend would not win us new friends, it would just leave us without a friend in a place where we need more. Stabbing your friend in the back because you are scared of his enemy will not make that enemy your friend (although he would like you to think so).

   replyreport
   1. 60

      egivposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      1. I never said we should turn our backs on Israel. I said we should tone down support for them, which is unconditional right now. That is, even if Israel does something against US interests (like spy on the US, or promote policies that the US doesn't agree with, like settlements), we give them an outrageously high amount of money unconditionally. This is not true for any other country in the world. I don't advocate stabbing them in the back, but treating them as we treat every other country in the world.
      
      2. There's no evidence to prove that "they hate us" based on principles. They hate us because we support Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories, which is seen by the Arab world as wrong. In fact, it has been shown fairly often that Arabs like our ideals of freedom and justice, but we don't treat them the way we treat Americans.
      
      3. Syria has directly offered to help us fight terrorism in the Middle East (which they now support) if we meet them halfway. But, we said no, and were hostile. Why? Because there is a part of Syria, the Golan Heights, that Israel took from them, and they want it back. So all Israel has to do is give up this small portion of land (that is not theirs anyway) and then both the US and Israel would have a new ally and one less state sponsor of terrorism.

      replyreport
6. 78

   brimancandyposted 14 years ago

   I am tired of hearing about Terrorism. The more we talk about them, and their various groups, the more they use it to their advantage. Someone needs to put a gag order on the media and tell them to stop saying the names of these groups, or give them any credit for what they are doing.
   
   Then maybe 5 years from now people will wonder what an Allbita
   is? Or, is that an alrighta? And who is Moron Brazier? And, what's a Salomy bin latent? Is that a sandwich?
   
   All I have to say to terrorists is Od ne! Shabuta!

   replyreport
7. 58

   Unkotareposted 14 years ago

   Somehow I don't think ignoring terrorists is possible or would make them go away.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      brimancandyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I wasn't suggesting that ignoring the problem would go away.
      But, it would certainly decrease the spread of the fear.
      I was simply suggesting that not giving individual groups credit
      for their actions would make it less likely that people would fear them every time their name is mentioned.
      
      Throw them all in a group togther. each time you mention them by name, you are only adding fuel to their fire. And, they are more than likely to repeat their terror and get more people looking for them, and finding them because they know which group is doing what.
      
      The less said about them in nations where people do not know them, the less likely it is that their numbers will increase.
      The media is doing nothing more than giving them a free recruiting tool. not only mentioning what they do, but, telling people who seek them exactly where they might find them.
      
      The latest terrorist hot spot that nobody knew about is Yemin.
      and now terrorists wannabes seem to be flooding there.
      
      I got an idea, tell them there is a huge group forming on some uninhabbitted Island. Wait til they get a few thousand there
      and blow the bitch up! End of group.

      replyreport
8. 58

   Unkotareposted 14 years ago

   Maybe when the threat to Israel's existence ceases to be unconditional, our support of them need not be.
   
   
   And do you really think people who are bused in by the government to burn our flags and hang our leaders in effigy in the street and scream for hours about the 'great satan' are just looking for an excuse to love us? Hang one of our only friends in the region out to dry and suddenly God will tell them he was just kidding about the whole 'wipe them off the face of the earth' thing? Doesn't sound like a good gamble to me. Sounds like something else entirely to me.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      egivposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Even when United States support for Israel was nonexistent or low, like the 48 and 56 wars, Israel dominated. They are now the hands-down powerhouse in the Middle East, with a bunch of nukes no less. They could dominate every other army in the Middle East with no problem. I think they can stand up for themselves without $500 per citizen, courtesy of the US taxpayers.

      replyreport
      1. 58

         Unkotareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         You sure about that? I'm not.

         replyreport
9. 58

   Unkotareposted 14 years ago

   I don't believe that nobody knew about Yemen before now, and what you are talking about would require the suspension of freedom of speech. I'm sorry, but that's not a likely course of action.

   replyreport