The issue of US-Israeli relations is an important one today and I would like to continue it from where the actual political discussion left off.
Keep your 5th-grade insults to yourselves. Arguing on the internet is like the special Olympics; even if you win, you're still retarded.
You want to prevent insults in the thread so you open with a preemptive insult? Good thinking.
And do not use the term "retarded" as a joke. It is offensive and inappropriate. Thank you.
At most we've been supporting then for only 30 years. That's what the whole embargo thing in 1973 was about. Before then the IDF had to be very good because their enemies were supplied with the latest in Soviet arms. Heck during their war for independence they took on the combined armies of five Arabic countries and still managed to survive. They don't really need our help, much as they welcome it.
Part of the problem is that this has become a multi-generational fight. Few, if any, of the people involved today remember the origins of the modern phase of this conflict and there are so many others who use the Israeli and Palestinian people for their own domestic purposes that neither side can get a fair shake.
That being said, they are one of the only countries in the region which share most of our beliefs on civilization and society in general. It would be madness not to support them. The day the Arab countries start extending liberty to their nations, that will be the day we extend the olive branch, not before. And that day could arrive much quicker than most realize. Communication technology took down the Soviets and is slowly working its magic on tyrants the world over.
You say they don't need out help, which at this point may be true. But how did it get that way? Infinite US support. The Israeli lobby is one of the most powerful in the United States government, which is why only a president with balls will stand up to it.
I completely disagree that most people involved in the conflict don't remember the origins. Have you ever spoken to a Palestinian? They are still bitter about the Crusades! Like hell they don't remember the origins - it's not that difficult to remember anyway: Israel just established a state on their land. Israelis are fully aware of the origins as well, but for them it is a point of national pride.
The palastinians have no arguement, period. They continually failed to clean-up their bad-guys which led to the Israelies contempt for them saying one thing and doing the most destructive things to inhibit any chance for co-habitation with the Jews. When they realize they screwed up they appeal to the worlds bleeding hearts for a do-over. That is unbelievably stupid and the only thing more stupid is the bleeding hearts that get sucked in, unbelievable!
You constantly group entire populations together, as if they all agree on everything. Who failed to "clean up the bad guys?" Hamas? They were democratically elected. Palestinians civilians that living in Gaza are getting screwed. They absolutely have an argument. Hamas fires rockets at Israel like idiots, Israel responds and kills 1,000 civilians. Does that stop Hamas? OF COURSE NOT! Who loses? Normal people.
Quit saying "they" or claiming what "Palestinians" want or deserve. Who are you to make that judgement anyway?
The palastinians must clean up their own house before they point their fingers at anyone else. Now here's the part you seem to miss, the whole arab world is against the Israelies. One of the main reasons are the palastinians. So, sweetie, when I say 'they' I'm refering to the arab community as a whole because they often act as one.
Has anybody stopped to think they are both at fault? The palestinians attack Israel and vice-versa. The fact of the matter remains that we support Israel with millions and billions of dollars with aid and do nothing for the other side but talk about lasting peace.
If you supply an addict with the paraphernalia to continue his ways what makes you think he will ever stop? I think it is an extreme example and in no way think the Israelies are drug addicts but my point is if we continue down the same tract how can we expect a different result. Wait a minute! WHO PUT US IN CHARGE?
The deep generational divide this conflict has created has hurt the notion of peace immeasurably. Isreal is constantly expanding its border in plain sight of the palestinians and the world. You can buy land from realtors in New York!
I think if Israel was to have to stand up to what they believe in on their own they would find a way and inspiration to find peace.
Border expansion? Lets see they gave back the Sinai, Gaza and the West Bank. Theres no end to their demands except Israel that must no longer exsit.
As far as our role in the world, I agree, we should stop helping everyone and take care of our selves. If you're not an American we don't need you!
True for Sinai, not true for Gaza and West Bank (esp the latter). Neither are sovereign Arab land.
One demand the Palestinian side is right to insist on (because the Israelis agreed to it) is the stopping of settlement expansion. Because Israel is run by the Right right now, and they are dominated by the ultra-religious who don't respect any Arab claim to land in the area, that agreement isn't being honored.
I disagree that we don't need anyone but I completely agree that we should scale back our involvement in the world. Eisenhower's parting warning about the military-industrial complex, however, was never more true.
National pride? How about it is about survival.
The safety and security of Israel is the only guarantee for oil supplies and mari-time shipping. If there is no Israel, the Arab countries will certainly block the supply of petroleum to other countries. They will certainly close down the Suez canal for international shipping. So, Israel should be safeguarded by America or anyone else.
Really? Because Arab countries hate money? That oil would do them a lot of good if they didn't sell it? They'd shut down a trade route because that would help them how exactly?
I an inclined to agree with Tksensei, I found Noam Chomski's MIT lecture entitled 'war on terror?' on this subject very interesting, and possibly a little enraging. America is of course securing it's own interests by backing israel, but that doesnt make it a good thing if you are not an American. It may even be a good thing if Arab countries had more autonomous control over what is in reality their own oil reserves without the hammer of the west poised above their heads, were are going to need alternative power sources one day.
Arabs can interrupt oil supplies and navigation for short periods.... till the economy of enemy countries worsens.
That is an irrational and unfounded supposition. Most oil producing countries have economies almost entirely dependent on selling that oil. They would suffer more quickly and more deeply than any "enemy."
Exactly tksensei and willsteele61, the OPEC nations basically control the price of oil and most of those countries are Arab. Support for Israel by the US probably influences the price negatively.
I'll answer that rhamson with this recent News report from September 7, 2009 just in case sneakorocksolid didn't understand your question.
Israel approves new West Bank settlement
This is contrary to what Obama said in May of this year.
Israel has obligation to halt West Bank settlement growth: Obama
Tomorrow, Sept. 22, 2009 Obama will be having a meeting with Palestinian and Israeli authorities in New York. We'll soon see what Obama has planned. Personally I hope he tells Israel to get out of the occupied territories or the US will end all support. Here's some maps for the uninformed.
Zionist colonies in Palestine at the beginning of the British Mandate 1920
Link to enlarge map
The United Nations Partition Plan of 1947.
Link to enlarge map
Link to enlarge map
West Bank showing the illegal Israeli settlements, walls and fences.
Link to enlarge map
Lets remember these were occupied after hostilities. Israel, out of the kindness of their hearts, has been willing to negociate these lands for peace, which will never happen.
So, your contention is if Israel removes the settlements in Gaza and the West Bank, that will result in the end of all hostillities and all arab countries will lawfully acknowledge Israels right to exist and punish any and all arab groups if the peace is violated. If by chance the arabs lose their minds and attack Israel again, Israel can keep the land they take with the worlds blessing.
Well lets here some of that good ole islamic logic now. Bleeding hearts can chirp in too.
You are barely worth replying to sneakorocksolid, but here goes. Israel pulled their illegal settlements out of Gaza a couple of years ago to make it a prison for the Palestinians there.
Even Israeli Professor Neve Gordon says Israel made Gaza a prison for the Palestinians.
Israeli Professor Neve Gordon Condemns Israeli Invasion of Gaza on Democracy Now 1/5/09
The illegal settlements mentioned are in the West Bank as the above map shows and elsewhere.
sneakorocksolid you need to do some research before making a some what intelligent comment in this thread.
Why was America dicovered ?
To keep the Americans there.
We don't need you guys anywhere.
What so ever. Get the message!
Over and Out.
To hell with them let them start paying their fair share and when they want to save the world let them pay for that too!Since our irish friend is so out spoken they should voluteer to move the UN mess to their country and we should withdraw our membership to that stupid club!
The US has basically withdrawn from the UN anyways seeing they have vetoed over 300 UN Resolutions against Israel. The only way for the UN to work properly is to eliminate the Security Council's veto power. But I doubt that you understand what I'm talking about sneakorocksolid.
And by the way I'm not a Muslim, just one of the concerned majority in the world that sees oppression when it stares them in the face. I'm not a Jew either but I stand shoulder to shoulder with the millions of Jews against Israel.
So you think the world could do with out our help, hey, I agree with you! I understand that there are alot of zealots like you who would do whatever they can to hurt the Israelies. We are left to stand with the underdog while are "allies" stab us in the back. The same people who want our trade, money, access to our universities, healthcare system, tecnology and our jobs are the same that don't understand what side their bread is buttered on. I am serious as a heart attack we should tell the world feed, defend, develop, research and educate your own way through life.
This is not a Muslim territorial issue. It's an Arab territorial issue. I gather you understand that.
Millions? I think you mean "dozens."
No I mean millions. It takes more than a dozen to write a lot of the 14,000,000 web sites that come up with the above search and more than a dozen to write the 2,640,000 web sites that come up with a Google search for Jews against zionism.
The person that I was replying to thought that I was a Muslim so I corrected him.
Wow, and millions of Arabs for Israel, too!
Would have never known if you hadn't shown me this quick, statistically-rigorous way to determine the number of supporters out there.
You're are the nicest most kind person I ever met!
I agree 100%! We should pack up our military, close our borders and severly restrict trade. I know we don't any ungrateful Leeches!
I'm sorry...but I have noticed this on several forum threads. What is up with all the "I hate Americans" posts? You are aware you are writing on an American based site, yeah?
Because it is based in America, should everyone follow American policies?
lol I don't see your assumptive statement written anywhere within my words. This was a direct question asked of the person I quoted.
Absolutely not. Actually, althought HubPages is based in the U.S.co, nearly half the participants are from other countries which is one reason why it is interesting.
Hey sneakorocksolid from now on when you reply to a post that I made keep your reply outside of my quote, so your reply does not look like it was said by me.
You said this within my quote.
"I also hope that comes with a caveat, that if any hostillity occurs towards Israel once they leave the occupied land then they amy take it back and keep it!"
You actually think Israel is going to leave the occupied lands peacefully do you?
You also said this within my quote.
"If combatant #1 attacks combatant #2 and loses then the land occupied by combatant #1 that is lost at the end of hostilities and comes under control of combatant #2 becomes the property of combatant #2, NO DO OVERS!"
No do overs? We are not talking about marbles or some other child's game. Besides who made up your rules. If every country was to act like that there would be more wars.
Oh mm, you're not going to cry are you? That is a well established way of answering someones arguement point by point. Look sweety, I'm going to do whatever I want and you can go cry in a corner. To avoid this in the future sweety, I suggest you make one point at a time and the need to answer the way I did will be unnecessary.
Look you've yet to answer my complete post which means you have no intention to be honest. If you want your name associated with a bunch of clowns, go for it! I'll stick with the sane and rational, thanks.
Achieving a peaceful settlement in Palestine along the lines proposed by Clinton and now Obama would remove a significant motive for terrorism against the United States and our allies. The perception that the United States one-sidedly supports Israel on issues involving Palestine has damaged our relations throughout the Arab world and helped Al Qaida recruit and train terrorists bent on attacking us in the United States and our facilities around the world. Bush and Cheney brag that they prevented further terrorist attacks since 9-11 when the truth is that our unnecessary, foolish and costly invasion of Iraq caused more, not less, terrorism. Our invasion of Iraq attracted and created a training ground for terrorists from throughout the Middle East.
Yeah, forcing Israel to give up its land will make them love us! Sheeeeeeeeeeeeesh!
Forcing Israel to give up the illegal settlements is the one and only road map for peace in the middle east.
"Illegal"? According to what law?
If you believe Israel is an illegitimate state and want to see it cease to exist then come right out and say so. There are others who agree with you, if you want to be in their company.
Illegal settlements according to over 300 UN resolutions against Israel. Scroll back through this thread.
I said no such thing regarding Israel's right to exist. And neither has Hammas according to a UN envoy to Palestine that I heard interviewed on CBC this past week. In fact this UN envoy said just before Israel's bloody incursions into Gaza in Dec 2008 and Jan 2009 that Hammas was drawing up plans to end all missiles for a period of ten years. When the CBC reporter asked the UN envoy what Canada could do to help the peace process the UN envoy basically said to keep all reports on the middle east unbiased. It was clearly obvious that the CBC reporter was taken aback with this comment. The next time the report aired that day the expression on the CBC reporter's face was filtered out. The CBC reporter was Hairy Forestelle.
Those 300 UN resolutions were probably brought up by the Muslim countries in their continuous effort to discredit Israel. I don't think those resolutions are credible.
It doesn't matter if you think they are credible or not. Yeah they were brought up by UN officials, independent reporting and of course Muslims themselves. Let's face it that is who the Israeli Defense Force are committing these human rights acts against.
Anybody read the Goldstone Report?
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hr … Report.pdf
That is quite the report Ralph. The uninformed that come in here should be forced to read it.
Amen. The B.S. gets piled pretty high and deep around here sometimes by people who have very strong opinions based on very few facts.
LOL! Is the UN the governing body of the state of Israel?
The adoption of UNSCOP's recommendation to partition Palestine by the United Nations General Assembly in 1947 was one of the earliest decisions of the UN. Since then, it maintained a central role in this region, especially by providing support for Palestinian refugees via the UNRWA and by providing a platform for Palestinian political claims via the CEIRPP, the UNDPR, the SCIIP, the UNISPAL and the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. The UN has sponsored several peace negotiations between the parties, the latest being the 2002 Road map for peace.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel,_Pa … ed_Nations
TK, I don't recall that you have ever contributed a fact to any discussions on this forum. And your hubs, in my opinion, reveal evidence of mental issues.
Boohoo. Go back to sleep with your dead squirrel, little doggie.
Ah, you didn't finish part III
http://hubpages.com/hub/Wolfgang-vs-the … -continued
Here's something that bears on the legal status of Israel from Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs which acknowledges a UN role in its founding--
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace%20Proce … f%20Israel
Here's the Wikipedia entry on Israel's borders:
Here are a couple of relevant excerpts:
n March 1921, Colonial Secretary, Winston Churchill, visited Jerusalem. After a discussion with Emir Abdullah it was agreed that the Jewish National Home objective for the proposed Palestinian Mandate territory would not apply to the Mandate territory EAST of the Jordan River. In accordance with that agreement, the Churchill White Paper of June 3, 1922 stated explicitly that "the terms of the [Balfour] Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded 'in Palestine'."
The United Nations in June 2000 was called upon to decide the border between Lebanon and Israel, in order to determine whether Israel had fully withdrawn from Lebanon in compliance with Security Council Resolution 425. This line came to be called the Blue Line. At the same time, the United Nations did not have to consider the legally demarcated international boundary between Lebanon and the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights, as that was not required for the purpose of Resolution 425. Accordingly, the border between Lebanon and the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights is expressly not to be called the Blue Line.
Some additional History for fact sake; Jon
The Balfor Decloration Below,
LEGAL RIGHT OF ISRAEL FOR ALL THE LAND WEST OF JORDAN
ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW, ISRAEL HAS THE LEGAL RIGHT TO ALL OF THE LAND WEST OF THE JORDAN INCLUDING THE WEST BANK. Of course the PLO and the Arab terrorists claim the West Bank as their own. However, we must look at the evidence for the truth: the Balfour Agreement. Below is a summary of the events.
In 1517, the Turks controlled the Middle East for 400 years. In 1917, the British won the war due to the help of the brilliant Jewish chemist Cheim Weizman. As a result, Lord Balfour gave the Jews their homeland consisting of all of Jordan and the land west of the Jordan River. This was called the Balfour Agreement.
In 1920, the League of Nations ratified the Balfour Agreement. In 1922, under pressure from the Arabs, the British and the League of Nations took away Jordan. The Jews and the Arabs signed this agreement. In 1947, the UN offered the Partition Plan, but the Arabs rejected it. When the United Nations recognized Israel as a nation on May 14, 1948, the Arabs declared war on Israel. Israel defended herself, but Jordan took the West Bank. In the 1967 war Israel took back the West Bank which was legally hers by international law.
Below is more information on this agreement:
Historical Importance: The 1917 letter that made public the British support of a Jewish homeland in Palestine led the League of Nations to entrust the United Kingdom with the Palestine Mandate in 1922.
Dates: November 2, 1917
Overview of the Balfour Declaration: The Balfour Declaration, a letter from British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Lord Rothschild in which the British made public their support of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, was a product of years of careful negotiation. After centuries of living in a diaspora, the 1894 Dreyfus Affair in France shocked Jews into realizing they would not be safe from arbitrary anti-semitism unless they had their own country. In response, Jews created the new concept of political Zionism in which it was believed that through active political maneuvering, a Jewish homeland could be created. Zionism was becoming a popular concept by the time World War I began. During World War I, Great Britain needed help. Since Germany (Britain's enemy during WWI) had cornered the production of acetone -- an important ingredient for arms production -- Great Britain may have lost the war if Chaim Weizmann had not invented a fermentation process that allowed the British to manufacture their own liquid acetone. It was this fermentation process that brought Weizmann to the attention of David Lloyd George (minister of ammunitions) and Arthur James Balfour (previously the British prime minister but at this time the first lord of the admiralty). Chaim Weizmann was not just a scientist; he was also the leader of the Zionist movement. Weizmann's contact with Lloyd George and Balfour continued, even after Lloyd George became prime minister and Balfour was transferred to the Foreign Office in 1916. Additional Zionist leaders such as Nahum Sokolow also pressured Great Britain to support a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Though Balfour, himself, was in favor of a Jewish state, Great Britain particularly favored the declaration as an act of policy. Britain wanted the United States to join World War I and the British hoped that by supporting a Jewish homeland in Palestine, world Jewry would be able to sway the U.S. to join the war. Though the Balfour Declaration went through several drafts, the final version was issued on November 2, 1917, in a letter from Balfour to Lord Rothschild, president of the British Zionist Federation. The main body of the letter quoted the decision of the October 31, 1917 British Cabinet meeting. This declaration was accepted by the League of Nations on July 24, 1922 and embodied in the mandate that gave Great Britain temporary administrative control of Palestine.
In 1939, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration by issuing the White Paper, which stated that creating a Jewish state was no longer a British policy. It was also Great Britain's change in policy toward Palestine, especially the White Paper, that prevented millions of European Jews to escape from Nazi-occupied Europe to Palestine.
The Balfour Declaration (it its entirety):
November 2nd, 1917
Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
Arthur James Balfour
I do believe that the American people are not the people of problems, The American people are the people of Solutions.
"In both Houses of Parliament there is growing movement of hostility, against Zionist policy in Palestine, which will be stimulated by recent Northcliffe articles. I do not attach undue importance to this movement, but it is increasingly difficult to meet the argument that it is unfair to ask the British taxpayer, already overwhelmed with taxation, to bear the cost of imposing on Palestine an unpopular policy."
Feb 1922 Winston Churchill
Sir John Evelyn Shuckburgh of the new Middle East department of the Foreign Office discovered that the correspondence prior to the declaration was not available in the Colonial Office, 'although Foreign Office papers were understood to have been lengthy and to have covered a considerable period'." The 'most comprehensive explanation' of the origin of the Balfour Declaration the Foreign Office was able to provide was contained in a small 'unofficial' note of Jan 1923 affirming that:
"little is known of how the policy represented by the Declaration was first given form. Four, or perhaps five men were chiefly concerned in the labour-the Earl of Balfour, the late Sir Mark Sykes, and Messrs. Weizmann and Sokolow, with perhaps Lord Rothschild as a figure in the background. Negotiations seem to have been mainly oral and by means of private notes and memoranda of which only the scantiest records are available, even if more exists."
So of the 4 or 5 deciders on the Balfour Declaration 3 of them were zionists.
"The Arabs expressed disapproval in November 1918 at the parade marking the first anniversary of the Balfour Declaration. The Muslim-Christian Association protested the carrying of new 'white and blue banners with two inverted triangles in the middle'. They drew the attention of the authorities to the serious consequences of any political implications in raising the banners.
Later that month, on the first anniversary of the occupation of Jaffa by the British, the Muslim-Christian Association sent a lengthy memorandum and petition to the military governor protesting once more any formation of a Zionist state."
The Arabs had good reason for expressing disapproval. Have you ever heard of Lawrence of Arabia? Lawrence of Arabia, an English officer made the deal with the Arabs of Palestine and the surrounding region that they would unite the Arab tribes to overthrow the Turks that had controlled the region for the previous 400 years for the promise that there would not be a zionist state in Palestine. The Turks were overthrown by the Arab tribes. So Balfour and the 3 zionists had no right to draw up the Balfour Declaration. No wonder it holds no weight. Besides what right would England have in giving a peoples land to another people.
Thanks for bumping up my posts. I hope everyone takes a look at those links.
by Dave McClure8 years ago
In a 90 minute 'debate', neither Joe Biden nor Sarah Palin even once used the dreaded P-Word. Both candidates made a point of declaring their unquestioned support for their no.1 ally and friend in the Middle East,...
by Shinkicker5 years ago
The Israeli occupation and brutal military rule of Palestinian land is illegal. That's the law!!!The West Bank is not 'disputed' territory. It belongs to the Palestinians. That's the law!! The Israeli settlements are...
by Mustafa Khursheed6 weeks ago
I support a sustainable two state solution that both can live with. I hope such a thing exists.
by Yes Dear3 years ago
A Bill, “H.R. 4133: United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012,” legally binds America to a “Jewish” state.The Resolution was passed under a procedure called “suspension of the rules”...
by Thomas Byers4 years ago
The Palestinian Authority is expected to win an upgrade of its observer status at the United Nations on Thursday from "entity" to "non-member state," which would amount to implicit U.N. recognition...
by undermyhat5 years ago
Britain may be treating their fighting men and women right by getting them into the Olympics but for all the wrong reasons. Attendence is very disappointing so to fill the seats the British Olympics is giving...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.