Benefits of Supporting Israel

[William Joyce]

Excellent letter to the editor (Los Angeles Times)

"Israel will doubtless ignore any U.N. resolutions that result from its summary assassination of Yassin, paid for with our tax dollars and executed with our missiles and helicopter gunships. America will be attacked again as the 'poodle' of the Israelis, only this time it may really hurt. We have no business supporting Israel's religious-based claim to Palestinian land; it's just theft, and we are all going to pay with blood for tacitly supporting the bloodthirsty Sharon." Chris Williamson, Oxnard

 

[Hobbit]

1) If Palestinians are so concerned about having their own country, why didn't they speak up when it was part of Jordan? It's all just another excuse to hate Jews, and whether or not they had this excuse of wanting their own country, I guarantee you there'd still be Arabs killing Jews in Israel every day. If they Jews had never left that land, and had held it as a country ever since the conquest of Canaan, there would still be Arabs trying to kill them. There have been since Joshua crossed the Jordan river.

2) Hamas will not attack the U.S. They saw what we did to Saddam and the Taliban, and they know that if they do anything to us, we'll have special forces all over the West Bank in a week.

 

[William Joyce]

I don't dispute the meat of both your points. Arabs are a mess. But that doesn't mean I should be dragged into the wars between them and Jews. That's Semite business, not Aryan business.

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by William Joyce
I don't dispute the meat of both your points. Arabs are a mess. But that doesn't mean I should be dragged into the wars between them and Jews. That's Semite business, not Aryan business.

William, I don't believe you are a socialist, nor an Islamist. And if were not only a racist (given most everyone is to some degree), wouldn't there there be a perfectly good national interest in backing the most liberal, capitalist regime in the Middle East, given our own way of life? That is, assuming you are not an isolationalist overall, does Isreal not represent the most similar form of government to America, and worthy of our support? If not, please be specific to your factual basis for why this state is no better than an Islamic one.

 

[William Joyce]

You've framed it pretty broadly --- first, I'd ask, why should we support anyone, ever? We don't really "support" the liberal, free-market governments of Europe (Germany, Francy, U.K., etc.) because they don't need it. We support them militarily, but that is mutual, part of NATO --- they pledge support to us, as well. That's a natural arrangment because they're mostly white, as are we.

But Israel isn't self-supporting at all. They get billions in aid from us, military aid, too. I wouldn't call it "liberal," really, given their treatment of Palestinians. If we're going to support them, what do we get in return? It's not like we need them for oil --- we've had deals worked out with the sheikhs for years.

My objection to supporting Israel is that it's got no justification for us. We do it because Jews are powerful and influential in the U.S. That's wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by William Joyce
You've framed it pretty broadly --- first, I'd ask, why should we support anyone, ever? We don't really "support" the liberal, free-market governments of Europe (Germany, Francy, U.K., etc.) because they don't need it. We support them militarily, but that is mutual, part of NATO --- they pledge support to us, as well. That's a natural arrangment because they're mostly white, as are we.

But the exception to this is what you should be aware of…we support Japan and South Korea and Taiwan, with considerable military effort, not because they are white but because they are liberal democracies. I know personally how the people therein live and work, as I’ve been to all three countries. Racial characteristics and cultural “non-whiteness” pale in comparison to the civilizing operations of these three precious capitalistic democratic nations. In each, a Euro-Caucasian such as myself, felt perfectly at ease and comfortable living in, very similar to my own home of Seattle, WA.

In no case has the overriding safety of Western Liberalism (incl. My life in Hong Kong 15 months) among these three non-White dominant cultures given me the same sense of revulsion and fear as my own experience in living in a state under communism nor tyrannical tendencies.

But Israel isn't self-supporting at all. They get billions in aid from us, military aid, too. I wouldn't call it "liberal," really, given their treatment of Palestinians. If we're going to support them, what do we get in return? It's not like we need them for oil --- we've had deals worked out with the sheikhs for years.

Why do you continue to ignore the rationale of such aid? I mentioned very clearly the billions given to both Egypt and Israel, promised in return for the stability of the Middle East. This was a design conceived by Carter under Camp David. Now you for one would readily admit our vulnerability to the Middle East oil cartel, and such a successful peace policy, costing billions, has paid dividends far less costly than these annual outlays to both of the most powerful nations to maintain the peace among each other.

My objection to supporting Israel is that it's got no justification for us. We do it because Jews are powerful and influential in the U.S. That's wrong, wrong, wrong.

Again I point out our consistent policy of International support for Liberal Democracy. Whether or not in your eyes, such support is “cost-effective”, you cannot challenge the moral basis for such action.

Factually demonstrate the government of Israel has proven to be domestically more tyrannical than any other Middle East government based on Islamic totalitarianism. America’s interest should NEVER be based upon the sacrifice of a Liberal state to appease a cartel of “Kingdoms” which rule the majority of the Middle East. Each would F*CK America for all it’s worth by conquering oil production and holding us hostage once our national will proved too weak to defeat a military monopoly (brought under a single caliphate) in control of the wells supplying half of the worlds oil production. Instead, our support of Iraq as a potential democracy, and by proxy the longevity of Israel as a similar government based on Liberal practice, represents our own desire for national sovereignty in a way you should recognize. You are too intelligent to be racially biased in foreign policy, I believe, William.

 

[William Joyce]

OK, India. That's a democracy. Why don't we have a military alliance with them (that I'm aware of)? You're right about the Asian countries, but those countries are also economically powerful, and Asians are closer to whites, genetically.

I would note that aid to Egypt is nothing more than a payoff for Israel's sake, such that we can combine the two payments and count them both for Israel.

Race is not the only factor in the direction of our foreign policy, but it's one that's much bigger than either liberals or conservatives of today care to admit.

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by William Joyce
OK, India. That's a democracy. Why don't we have a military alliance with them (that I'm aware of)? You're right about the Asian countries, but those countries are also economically powerful, and Asians are closer to whites, genetically.

Actually, an Indian alliance will make sense, but only if Pakistan falls to an Islamic coup. One reason we do not co-operate with India is based on the last 40 years of a military alliance with Pakistan. If you recall, India floats a mainly Russian navy, 2 of the Vstol Carriers + Soviet aircraft to based them from. Along with Subs, tanks, destroyers, frigates, etc...

A second reason is due to our economic relations in the region. We don't want to threaten China, which competes with India for local authority. So we give just enough support to both yet never ally with one, in order to serve stability in the region (no one feels threatened).

Finally, I believe as a self-interested government, and based upon the power and capability of India, we are not particularly interested in advancing their power in the region. As long as all respect US power, we can continue to serve as a moderator in the India/Pakistan conflict and try to hold this crazy world together. The worse thing we could do is to secure a diplomatic alliance that would serve to disrupt the "New world order".

I would note that aid to Egypt is nothing more than a payoff for Israel's sake, such that we can combine the two payments and count them both for Israel.

Well our payments to Isreal have been upped recently. But still, no matter how you face it, it's the cheapest solution.

OTHERWISE, tensions will escalate between Israel and it's neighbors (now that Egypt is in on it, no 2 Billion annual $$$'s to use for fun and games). Even if total war doesn't break our for the fifth time in the last 50 years, we'd still antagonize the oil sheiks over an escalating conflict. So then the oil flow get's shut off and we're royally burned. (Try five TRILLION dollars in losses from the last embargo!).

Race is not the only factor in the direction of our foreign policy, but it's one that's much bigger than either liberals or conservatives of today care to admit.

I'd actually put more credit to language and culture, than anything else. It's why the UK and Australia are the firmest allies we have, and why France and Russia are not.

It's why we took part in stabilizing the English speaking, American-tied, African race country of Liberia... right?