Senate Approves Resolution Backing Israel in Hamas Conflict

[elvis]

That was a long time ago and now it is the US that is attacking al Qaeda and the Taliban and other Islamic militants in Afghanistan and killing civilians, some undoubtedly innocent, in the process. One can also argue that Israel was attacked first by Hamas suicide bombers and Hamas rockets and that Hamas has just as strong a commitment to destroy Israel as al Qaeda has to destroy the US and that Israel has an even stronger justification for inflicting unavoidable civilian casualties in Gaza that the US has in Afghanistan because the range of Hamas' rockets has been steadily increasing so that without this current military operation, those rockets would soon be landing in Tel Aviv just as the planes crashed into the WTC and the Pentagon on 9/11.

This conflict has nothing to do with the US. That is what I was saying.

 

[Orange_Juice]

Every goddamn nation tries to gain an advantage thru some type of 'spying' or espionage... whether it be about military technology, business practices, information for future negotiations on something, etc... Prance and other Euro-Socialist trash do it as well

So get off your fucking high horse...

Wow! I'm sorry, who was the last Frenhman or Brit caught for spying on us?

You are so brainwashed you will go along with anything

 

[DiamondDave]

Wow! I'm sorry, who was the last Frenhman or Brit caught for spying on us?

You are so brainwashed you will go along with anything

Bubba... we notice it going on all the time... We dealt with security issues from ALL originating countries CONTINUALLY in military communications..

Do not fool yourself and don't go believing the Anti Semite propaganda that tries to paint it like they are ones spying and other allies are not

 

[Sunni Man]

America used to be on the side of Truth and Justice for all oppressed people of the world.

We once were a nation who loved Freedom and hated tyrany.

Our Founding Fathers would have stood by the Freedom Fighters of Hamas in their pursuit of Justice and Equality for the oppressed people of Gaza.

 

[WillowTree]

Go to hell you terrorist appeaser

How dare you even compare the terrorist, rocket lobbing, "destroy all of Israel" asshole Hamas pigs to the MinuteMen...

There is and was no country of Palestine.. you worthless piece of camel dung

Might I suggest to you judging by Sunni woman's avatar she is in fact not a terrorist appeaser but a true terrorist? Just a thought!

 

[AmericaFirst]

[youtube]<object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/j3Xl68kP4wo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/j3Xl68kP4wo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>[/youtube]

 

[toomuchtime_]

This conflict has nothing to do with the US. That is what I was saying.

In fact, the US does have strategic interests in the ME and US support for Israel as well as the more moderate Arab nations has secured 35 years without a major conflict between Israel and the Arab nations. In the 30 years before the US made this commitment, there were four major wars between Israel and the Arab nations. Of course, you can argue that the US has no business being concerned about anything that happens anywhere else in the world if it does not directly and immediately effect Americans.

On the other hand, if you are saying we should not be involved in Israel's problems with the Palestinians, we aren't in terms of policy and the Senate resolution has no effect on policy. Our policy only supports peace between Israel and the Arab nations.

 

[Sunni Man]

Might I suggest to you judging by Sunni man's avatar he is in fact not a terrorist appeaser but a true terrorist? Just a thought!

LOL!!! an avatar terrorist!!!

Now I have heard it all!!!

 

[WillowTree]

LOL!!! an avatar terrorist!!!

Now I have heard it all!!!

You are a disgusting excuse for a human being!

 

[elvis]

In fact, the US does have strategic interests in the ME and US support for Israel as well as the more moderate Arab nations has secured 35 years without a major conflict between Israel and the Arab nations. In the 30 years before the US made this commitment, there were four major wars between Israel and the Arab nations. Of course, you can argue that the US has no business being concerned about anything that happens anywhere else in the world if it does not directly and immediately effect Americans.

On the other hand, if you are saying we should not be involved in Israel's problems with the Palestinians, we aren't in terms of policy and the Senate resolution has no effect on policy. Our policy only supports peace between Israel and the Arab nations.

When the US gives jet bombers to Israel capable of hitting Iran without refueling, how is that promoting peace?
When Clinton responded to the helicopter shooting of Palestinians who were throwing rocks at soldiers by supplying 50 helicopters to Israel, how is that promoting peace?

 

[WillowTree]

What math? what do you mean?

You asked why Israel couldn't go it alone. Do the math!

 

[pfife]

Every goddamn nation tries to gain an advantage thru some type of 'spying' or espionage... whether it be about military technology, business practices, information for future negotiations on something, etc... Prance and other Euro-Socialist trash do it as well

Presuming he/she was talking about domestic spying on US citizens w/o warrants, I'm not entirely sure if every nation does it, but I largely find that irrelevant since in the US, where it occurred, there are laws that were democratically passed that were specifically designed to outlaw those kinds of practices.

 

[pfife]

In fact, the US does have strategic interests in the ME and US support for Israel as well as the more moderate Arab nations has secured 35 years without a major conflict between Israel and the Arab nations.

That means this conflict has something to do with us?

 

[toomuchtime_]

When Israel gives jet bombers capable of hitting Iran without refueling, how is that promoting peace?
When Clinton responded to the helicopter shooting of Palestinians who were throwing rocks at soldiers by supplying 50 helicopters to Israel, how is that promoting peace?

Actually, Israel's F-15's and F-16's would have to refuel if they wanted a realistic chance to get back home, but that is beside the point. The planes are given to Israel and Egypt so that neither will have an advantage over the other and therefore feel too threatened to keep the peace. The fact that Israel might have to fight a war on another front means that to keep parity with Egypt, Israel must have the capacity to fight that war and still be able to deter an aggression from Egypt at the same time. Historically, most of our military aid to Israel is mandated by the Egypt-Israel peace treaty which Jimmy Carter, one of Israel's harshest critics signed at the same time he was very critical of Israel's actions vis a vis the Palestinians.

Again, the decisions about how much Israel can spend on US weapons and just what weapons it is allowed to buy has been in no way influenced by the conflict with the Palestinians. You seem to be arguing that it should be, and that Israel should be punished for actions you disapprove of even if that would scuttle long standing US policy of promoting peace between Israel and the Arab nations. Do you really want the US to become that deeply involved in the conflict with the Palestinians that it sacrifices its own strategic interests?

 

[Modbert]

By Nicholas Johnston

Jan. 8 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Senate unanimously approved a resolution expressing support for Israel in its conflict with Hamas, while the House of Representatives prepared to act on a similar measure tomorrow.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said the measure “expresses vigorous support” for Israel.

“The Israelis have every right to defend themselves against these acts of terrorism,” said Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Israel is in its 13th day of military operations against the Islamic militant Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip in an effort to stop rocket attacks against southern Israeli towns.

Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said they had personally spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to express their support




Bloomberg.com: Politics




Well, just for Roberto,, I can say this is one thing the Democrats have done that I Happy now Roberto?

No big surprise here.

No other big surprise in the fact you think Democrats do something right when you agree with it.

 

[toomuchtime_]

That means this conflict has something to do with us?

Just the opposite. Other than trying to mediate the disputes and supporting peace negotiations, the US has pretty much stayed out of it.

 

[pfife]

Just the opposite. Other than trying to mediate the disputes and supporting peace negotiations, the US has pretty much stayed out of it.

my apologies, I interpreted your message as evidence that this conflict does have something to do with the US.

 

[elvis]

Actually, Israel's F-15's and F-16's would have to refuel if they wanted a realistic chance to get back home, but that is beside the point. The planes are given to Israel and Egypt so that neither will have an advantage over the other and therefore feel too threatened to keep the peace. The fact that Israel might have to fight a war on another front means that to keep parity with Egypt, Israel must have the capacity to fight that war and still be able to deter an aggression from Egypt at the same time. Historically, most of our military aid to Israel is mandated by the Egypt-Israel peace treaty which Jimmy Carter, one of Israel's harshest critics signed at the same time he was very critical of Israel's actions vis a vis the Palestinians.

Again, the decisions about how much Israel can spend on US weapons and just what weapons it is allowed to buy has been in no way influenced by the conflict with the Palestinians. You seem to be arguing that it should be, and that Israel should be punished for actions you disapprove of even if that would scuttle long standing US policy of promoting peace between Israel and the Arab nations. Do you really want the US to become that deeply involved in the conflict with the Palestinians that it sacrifices its own strategic interests?

Sorry, I had to edit the post. It's different now.

 

[pfife]

Actually, Israel's F-15's and F-16's would have to refuel if they wanted a realistic chance to get back home, but that is beside the point. The planes are given to Israel and Egypt so that neither will have an advantage over the other and therefore feel too threatened to keep the peace. The fact that Israel might have to fight a war on another front means that to keep parity with Egypt, Israel must have the capacity to fight that war and still be able to deter an aggression from Egypt at the same time. Historically, most of our military aid to Israel is mandated by the Egypt-Israel peace treaty which Jimmy Carter, one of Israel's harshest critics signed at the same time he was very critical of Israel's actions vis a vis the Palestinians.

Again, the decisions about how much Israel can spend on US weapons and just what weapons it is allowed to buy has been in no way influenced by the conflict with the Palestinians. You seem to be arguing that it should be, and that Israel should be punished for actions you disapprove of even if that would scuttle long standing US policy of promoting peace between Israel and the Arab nations. Do you really want the US to become that deeply involved in the conflict with the Palestinians that it sacrifices its own strategic interests?

So Israel attacks someone, and the US supplies weapons so they don't feel any of the military resource strain that comes with attacking someone? Why does the US feel Israel must be relieved of these negative consequences associated with fighting wars?

Shouldn't we want them to feel this resource strain, as it provides impetus for restraint? Assuming, of course, military restraint is desirable?

It seems to be part of the latest trend of the US government removing moral hazard for those it favors.

 

[toomuchtime_]

So Israel attacks someone, and the US supplies weapons so they don't feel any of the military resource strain that comes with attacking someone? Why does the US feel Israel must be relieved of these negative consequences associated with fighting wars?

Shouldn't we want them to feel this resource strain, as it provides impetus for restraint? Assuming, of course, military restraint is desirable?

It seems to be part of the latest trend of the US government removing moral hazard for those it favors.

The US imposes the condition on all weapons it sells that they only be used for defensive purposes. Of course, what is defense and what is offense it sometimes open to interpretation. However, considering that six of the eight Arab nations that invaded Israel in 1948 still maintain they are in a state of war with Israel, and that Iran now frequently calls for Israel to be wiped off the map, it is clear that Israel needs a very strong military if it is to survive. The fact is that Israel has not attacked any other nation since the US began selling weapons to Israel, so there has been no violation of the US's defense only condition on its sale of weapons.