Debate Now Is Israel our ally or not?

[1stRambo]

Yo, by the way, the French Leader is a Socialist!

"GTP"

 

[jwoodie]

It's an 'ally' that doesn't act like one.

It's an 'alliance' from which we get very little benefit.

This begs the underlying question of what is meant by an "ally." Is it some thing more than a country with whom we have "friendly" relations? Do we derive an economic or military benefit from our association with Israel? Is our support of Israel based primarily on religious/historical grounds? Should we guarantee its safety by a mutual defense treaty? Does anyone know where we stand on these issues?

 

[sealybobo]

Well, where to begin...

You can hear the echoes of a blunt object hitting hitting a dead horse somewhere, no doubt, but given how much Israel is in the news lately I hit upon a few observations:

1) The Obama Administration is solely responsible for souring relations between our two countries, specifically by the way they have treated Benjamin Netanyahu. Reference his visit to Congress in a couple of days as an example, and past comments to French President Nicholas Sarkozy.

2) As a result of such treatment, some misconstrue this as souring relations between American and Israeli peoples as a whole. That is not correct.

3) Even as John Kerry says Israel has been safer than it's ever been, Israel sits staring down the barrel of gun being loaded to bear in an already nuclear capable Iran, threats from Palestinian jihadists and ISIS.

4) Even as Israel pleads with the US not to engage in talks with Iran, they are being flatly ignored. It is my belief that if a deal is ever completed, Israel will have no choice but to act on their own by launching preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

5) The biggest danger to Israel I see now is not from terrorists or a budding nuclear power, but from our own government.

The main question here is:

Is Israel our ally or not?

The rules are as follows:

1. No anti-Semitic remarks.
2. No anti-Palestinian remarks.
3. No mention of specific parties (Republicans, Democrats).
4. No ad hominem (insulting the person instead of their position)
5. The political philosophies of the five people named in this thread (as they relate to Israel only) are open for discussion.
6. The issue is specifically our relationship with Israel currently, or whether they are our ally or not.
7. Arguments should be structured in a way as to agree or disagree, with an explanation as to why.
8. Attempts to derail the thread topic will be actively reported to forum staff.

Israel is a pain in our ass and a thorn in our side. I wish Israel was somewhere like Hawaii. No neighbors.

Care to expound?

You wouldn't have problems with your neighbors if we put you off on an island somewhere. Then we would understand why the Arab world doesnt recognize you because they wouldn't be able to see you so far away. Could you picked a worse piece of real estate?

I wonder which race or religions will disappear in the future? The Greek Egypt and African gods all disappeared. I wonder if the christian Jew Muslim Mormons or jehovas will ever die out. I'm talking hundreds of years. Or I should ask when because they are all eventually doomed IMO. And will there always be asians hawaiians blacks Mexicans Arian's or will we eventually become one mixed combination of all races?

This divisiveness has to stop.

 

[strollingbones]

no uss liberty ....proves that

 

[Foxfyre]

It's an 'ally' that doesn't act like one.

It's an 'alliance' from which we get very little benefit.

This begs the underlying question of what is meant by an "ally." Is it some thing more than a country with whom we have "friendly" relations? Do we derive an economic or military benefit from our association with Israel? Is our support of Israel based primarily on religious/historical grounds? Should we guarantee its safety by a mutual defense treaty? Does anyone know where we stand on these issues?

I think our 'alliance' with Israel is one that is more historical and emotional than anything formal. And Israel does receive financial aid from us but so does most of its Arab neighbors. I'm pretty sure our two countries don't have a mutual defense treaty, but it is almost a given that if Israel is attacked, the USA will get involved in a hurry.

However, Israel pretty much went it alone and successfully repulsed Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq who attacked them immediately when the U.N. issued the charter for Israel as a nation in 1948. And from 1967-73, Israel again fended off multiple assaults from its neighbor and took additional territory to iincrease defensible borders. Our only invovlement in that was to help negotiate a cease fire before a nuclear Russia got involved. And there were peace treaties and trading agreements between Israel, Jordan, and Egypt accomplished at that time.

To this day, however, I don't think any of Israel's hostile neighbors would initiate a full blown military attack because they know Israel would obliterate them and we wouldn't take kindly to that either. But they sure don't mind exporting terrorism upon Israel, furnishing or providing safe haven for rocket launches, suicide bombers, and whatever else they can use to make Israel's life as miserable as possible.

So there remains this odd symbiotic relationship between America and Israel. No politician dares speak against it if he or she hopes to get elected.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Bibi is not Israel.

Iran is not the threat to Israel that you think it is.

Israel is our ally, but so is Saudi Arabia. "Allies" does not mean that we put their desires over our own.

1) No, he is not, but he is the man who speaks for them. The way he is treated by our government reflects its views and opinions of him. He took an oath to do whatever it takes to protect Israel.

2) Why not? Iran already sponsors terrorism, shouldn't that represent a threat in an of itself? Also, Iran still hasn't gone back on its desire to destroy Israel

3) That is nothing but an attempt at equivalency. "Allies" means doing more than paying them lip service. I said nothing of putting their desires over our own.

The way he treats our government is the root of Bibi's problems, not the way we treat him. He's on the skids politically in Israel, and he's trying to gin up fear over Iran in a last-ditch play to stay in power.

Bibi is a politician. The people of Israel don't worship him nearly as much as the neo-cons in the US do. He's playing politics, and it's not working out the way he wanted. The US-Israel relationship hasn't changed. $3 Billion dollars of aid a year isn't "lip service".

 

[TemplarKormac]

You wouldn't have problems with your neighbors if we put you off on an island somewhere. Then we would understand why the Arab world doesnt recognize you because they wouldn't be able to see you so far away. Could you picked a worse piece of real estate?

I'm sorry, I don't follow you. You should be mad at the British if anything. They were the ones who drew the lines, the White Papers/Peel Commission.

I wonder which race or religions will disappear in the future? The Greek Egypt and African gods all disappeared. I wonder if the christian Jew Muslim Mormons or jehovas will ever die out. I'm talking hundreds of years. Or I should ask when because they are all eventually doomed IMO. And will there always be asians hawaiians blacks Mexicans Arian's or will we eventually become one mixed combination of all races?

With all due respect, you are making no sense whatsoever...

This divisiveness has to stop.

I agree. If we could simply convince Palestine to break away from the commitment they made in Khartoum all those years ago, we might get somewhere... perhaps to the bargaining table

 

[TemplarKormac]

The way he treats our government is the root of Bibi's problems, not the way we treat him.

I beg to differ. If it were Netanyahu pushing us, why would our own president threaten to shoot down his fighter jets if he took offensive action against Iran?

Obama Threatened to Shoot Down IAF Iran Strike - Middle East - News - Arutz Sheva

Call it speculation, doubt the veracity, do what you will, but the fact that there is even a possibility that Obama made such a threat should indicate how hostile the Obama Administration has become toward Netanyahu.

He's on the skids politically in Israel, and he's trying to gin up fear over Iran in a last-ditch play to stay in power.

If you don't want to hear it from Bibi, then take it from these guys:

IAEA has serious concerns as Iran boosts nuclear work Reuters

Bibi is a politician. The people of Israel don't worship him nearly as much as the neo-cons in the US do.

I will assume for the moment that you aren't suggesting I might be one of those 'neo cons.' I can't speak for his popularity in Israel, but his message has concrete roots.

The US-Israel relationship hasn't changed. $3 Billion dollars of aid a year isn't "lip service".

That $3 billion ties Israel's hands, meaning the US Government holds significant sway over Israeli military decisions. Do you really think Obama and Netanyahu would begin badmouthing each other on the global stage? Of course not, so they pay lip service to each other to try to cover for the hostility...

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The way he treats our government is the root of Bibi's problems, not the way we treat him.

I beg to differ. If it were Netanyahu pushing us, why would our own president threaten to shoot down his fighter jets if he took offensive action against Iran?

Obama Threatened to Shoot Down IAF Iran Strike - Middle East - News - Arutz Sheva

Call it speculation, doubt the veracity, do what you will, but the fact that there is even a possibility that Obama made such a threat should indicate how hostile the Obama Administration has become toward Netanyahu.

He's on the skids politically in Israel, and he's trying to gin up fear over Iran in a last-ditch play to stay in power.

If you don't want to hear it from Bibi, then take it from these guys:

IAEA has serious concerns as Iran boosts nuclear work Reuters

Bibi is a politician. The people of Israel don't worship him nearly as much as the neo-cons in the US do.

I will assume for the moment that you aren't suggesting I might be one of those 'neo cons.' I can't speak for his popularity in Israel, but his message has concrete roots.

The US-Israel relationship hasn't changed. $3 Billion dollars of aid a year isn't "lip service".

That $3 billion ties Israel's hands, meaning the US Government holds significant sway over Israeli military decisions. Do you really think Obama and Netanyahu would begin badmouthing each other on the global stage? Of course not, so they pay lip service to each other to try to cover for the hostility...

1. I don't understand your question. The fact that Bibi is "pushing" is why Obama is pushing back. The source for that "threat" is pretty dubious as well.

2. A two-year old report from IAEA is not evidence that Iran currently poses a significant threat to Israel.

3. "Neo Con" isn't a dirty word, it's an ideology. If you feel that it doesn't fit you as a descriptor, that's fine. But I don't mean it as an insult.

4. That's the way it goes in the real world. If Israel wants to go at it alone and make their own calls, they can do it without my tax dollars.

 

[TemplarKormac]

2. A two-year old report from IAEA is not evidence that Iran currently poses a significant threat to Israel.

What I was looking for was this:

IAEA chief cannot be sure Iran s nuclear program is peaceful The Times of Israel

3. "Neo Con" isn't a dirty word, it's an ideology. If you feel that it doesn't fit you as a descriptor, that's fine. But I don't mean it as an insult.

Fair enough.

4. That's the way it goes in the real world. If Israel wants to go at it alone and make their own calls, they can do it without my tax dollars.

Then why call them an ally if we aren't supporting them in any way possible?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

2. A two-year old report from IAEA is not evidence that Iran currently poses a significant threat to Israel.

What I was looking for was this:

IAEA chief cannot be sure Iran s nuclear program is peaceful The Times of Israel

3. "Neo Con" isn't a dirty word, it's an ideology. If you feel that it doesn't fit you as a descriptor, that's fine. But I don't mean it as an insult.

Fair enough.

4. That's the way it goes in the real world. If Israel wants to go at it alone and make their own calls, they can do it without my tax dollars.

Then why call them an ally if we aren't supporting them in any way possible?

Because being "allies" means that we work together - not that we give them money, and they tell us to fuck off.

 

[TemplarKormac]

2. A two-year old report from IAEA is not evidence that Iran currently poses a significant threat to Israel.

What I was looking for was this:

IAEA chief cannot be sure Iran s nuclear program is peaceful The Times of Israel

3. "Neo Con" isn't a dirty word, it's an ideology. If you feel that it doesn't fit you as a descriptor, that's fine. But I don't mean it as an insult.

Fair enough.

4. That's the way it goes in the real world. If Israel wants to go at it alone and make their own calls, they can do it without my tax dollars.

Then why call them an ally if we aren't supporting them in any way possible?

Because being "allies" means that we work together - not that we give them money, and they tell us to fuck off.

Actually, we're giving them money and telling them to fuck off. Kinda counterproductive.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Israel is our ally, but leftist antisemites who have been gobbling up decades of Arab and Islamic propaganda like to tell us they aren't. So, too, does the smaller percentage of extreme right antisemites. It's a one-two punch coming from both sides of the political spectrum.

Most people lack the intelligence to realize that the attitudes that dominate are not necessarily the ones to follow and in a world where Muslims outnumber Jews by a thousand to one, the cacophony of Jew hatred drowns out the voices that defend against it. Illiberal people join in the chorus as they are too stupid to understand the principle behind the tyranny of the majority.

It can prove difficult to place yourself in the position of defending a beleaguered people when vicious bigots motivated by ethnic hatred are all against them. Especially so when these people have political leverage. The Obama administration has taken the easy way out by appeasing these haters, thus his shunning of Israel.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Israel is a liability to the US. Israel keeps us needlessly entangled in the Middle East, to no benefit of the US.

Ironically, even as our changing fortunes in energy give us a decreasing need to be detrimentally entangled in the Middle East's problems,
being shackled to Israel essentially cancels out any chance we have to extricate ourselves from the ME mess.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't know how anybody could listen to Bibi's speech to Congress this morning and not know in his/her heart that Israel is not only our ally but the alliance is a very special one.

 

[jwoodie]

Mod Edit: Please review the rules for participation as put forth in the OP.

 

[Foxfyre]

Israel is our ally, but leftist antisemites who have been gobbling up decades of Arab and Islamic propaganda like to tell us they aren't. So, too, does the smaller percentage of extreme right antisemites. It's a one-two punch coming from both sides of the political spectrum.

Most people lack the intelligence to realize that the attitudes that dominate are not necessarily the ones to follow and in a world where Muslims outnumber Jews by a thousand to one, the cacophony of Jew hatred drowns out the voices that defend against it. Illiberal people join in the chorus as they are too stupid to understand the principle behind the tyranny of the majority.

It can prove difficult to place yourself in the position of defending a beleaguered people when vicious bigots motivated by ethnic hatred are all against them. Especially so when these people have political leverage. The Obama administration has taken the easy way out by appeasing these haters, thus his shunning of Israel.

Bibi was most gracious to both Obama in his opening remarks this morning, however, and expressed gratitude for what Obama has done for Israel. (????) And he was very positive and mentioned Harry Reid as well in those opening remarks and later in the address referred to Kerry as 'his good friend.' It is hard to imagine that he was sincere about all that, but he sure seemed sincere. And he just doesn't strike me as the sort of person who would say what he doesn't mean. So for whatever that is worth. . .

I was actually pleased to see Harry Reid on the front row in the chamber. Our President and the 50 some Democrats who boycotted the event should really be ashamed of themselves. I am deeply ashamed of them. Again, I think nobody capable of independent thought could have heard that speech and see Israel as anything other than our ally.

 

[ogibillm]

When you make a commitment to support an ally, it stands to reason that you don't negotiate treaties with their enemies, correct?

Absolutely incorrect. the intransigence of a supposed ally should not stand in the way of negotiations in our own best interests with anyone.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't know how anybody could listen to Bibi's speech to Congress this morning and not know in his/her heart that Israel is not only our ally but the alliance is a very special one.

Name the last time Israelis died fighting alongside Americans in any our wars and then you'll know what sort of an ally Israel is.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't know how anybody could listen to Bibi's speech to Congress this morning and not know in his/her heart that Israel is not only our ally but the alliance is a very special one.

Name the last time Israelis died fighting alongside Americans in any our wars and then you'll know what sort of an ally Israel is.

Israel was not a country in WWII and was still in formation stage in Korea. It was dealing with major Arab threats during Vietnam and we weren't helping Israel all that much at that time either though we did start selling arms to Israel during the Johnson administration.

In all the Arab/Muslim hostilities, we have specifically asked Israel not to get involved because things being the way they are, every administration has known that Israeli involvement would have only escalated things and angered our Arab allies. And since Vietnam, some military involvement hasn't involved any other countries (Granada and Panama). Those that have included other nation involvement have all been Arab and/or Muslim countries.

Israel didn't start receiving US aid until the Johnson administration and the USA had not been warm toward Israel joining NATO for fear that would drive the Arab nations into the arms of a hostile USSR. The Kosovo War in 1998 and 1999 was an all NATO operation that was not sanctioned by the U.N.