Why is America so closely allied with Israel?

[andyandy]

I ask this question with some trepidation given the subject, but it is something which I don't really understand. Listening to the two presidential candidates falling over themselves to profess how important the relationship with Israel is, the question to ask is why?

Sure, Israel is a democracy and in a region with the likes of Syria and Iran is a natural ally. But just being an ally does not explain the level of bilateral relations between the two nations which exceed those Israel relations of just about every other western democracy. Indeed, it is probably within America's strategic national interest to not be seen as closely aligned with Israel as it currently is. One can maintain close diplomatic ties and still offer criticism of specific policies or actions, and yet over the continued plight of Palestinian civilians, Israel's nuclear arsenal or the disproportionate bombing of Lebanon (for example), it seems that any political criticism is completely taboo.

Is it best understood in the same terms as America's Cuba policy? Which has become ideologically embedded in political discourse long after the specific arguments for such a position have been diminished? Is it best understood in terms of special interest groups? A need to garner votes in the key swing state of Florida? In terms of a pro-Israeli lobby in Washington? In terms of a pro-military lobby which benefits from multibillion pound defence contracts? In terms of evangelical Christians who see Israel as the staging post for the end of times good versus evil battle?

Given that (in my opinion) most objective observers would regard America's ultra-close Israel policy as detrimental to its national interest, there seems very little political discourse on the relative merits of a continuation of the status quo. So, why?

(I'm not especially optimistic that this thread will be able to avoid degenerating into the usual Israel-Palestine bunfight, but please could we try? :) )

[plumjam]

Tut tut Andyandy, don't you realise such questions are off-limits?
It's something that I've wondered about too. Best guess would be the number of rich, influential, powerful Jews living in the USA, who have, as it were, divided loyalties.. with the Israeli homeland having a greater pull on their heartstrings than the USA.

[Oliver]

Maybe I'm completely overestimating the influence of AIPAC and other
Pro-Israeli Lobbies, but I also found no other explanation other than
Israel being a [rather small] geo-strategical advantage for the US.

[Cylinder]

That's a very complex question. The history of the US ties to Israel lies in a hedge against the expansion of Soviet influence in the Southwest Asia. I suspect it was also aided by demographic and political realities in the aftermath of WWII.

By that, I mean that the US retained intact Jewish political organizations that were largely dismantled throughout Europe and for US citizens not really affected by Jewish issues there was a great groundswell of support in the wake of the terrible realization of the scope of the holocaust. Of course, these events coincided with the ascendancy of US power worldwide.

Today, Israel retains much of the benefits of that special relationship that was forged during the Cold War. I think, too, that the memory of the holocaust still fuels support for voters not really affected by Jewish concerns. It does not hurt Israel's case that the current crop of enemies of our republic have been the enemies of Israel for some time.

[Dragoonster]

Is it best understood in the same terms as America's Cuba policy? Which has become ideologically embedded in political discourse long after the specific arguments for such a position have been diminished? Is it best understood in terms of special interest groups? A need to garner votes in the key swing state of Florida? In terms of a pro-Israeli lobby in Washington? In terms of a pro-military lobby which benefits from multibillion pound defence contracts? In terms of evangelical Christians who see Israel as the staging post for the end of times good versus evil battle?

Given that (in my opinion) most objective observers would regard America's ultra-close Israel policy as detrimental to its national interest, there seems very little political discourse on the relative merits of a continuation of the status quo. So, why?

I'm not sure, fellow orang. All of your hypthoseses might be true. Of those I'd say the powerful lobby is number one. The Cuba analogy is really good too.

I don't think the evangelical one is powerful. Could be though that Judaism is close enough to Christianity that Christians or fundamentalists favor them over well, their Islamic enemies. Also, Israeli Jews are generally "whiter" than some of the other Arab states, and I imagine that's played a small role. One of the bigger aspects might also be the history of persecution of Jews including of course the Holocaust, and the memories of World War II camps from US veterans having a trickle-down generational effect.

Part of it may play into the general ideological philosophy of many Americans--the polar, "with us or against us" mindset. Anti-semitism is one of the more terrible pure evils of the world in the 20th century, not only Germany but later the USSR and elsewhere. Since it's so easy to detest, supporting the opposite seems a 100% noble cause, no matter whether the actual Israel being supporting has some serious flaws. Some may support the ideal Israel, rather than the more radical Zionist tendencies of its actual government.

One final thing is probably another ideological staple (though imo not truly followed): Support for democracy. Throughout the Cold War and today Israel could be pointed to as a shining beacon of such, and by supporting them as much as we have is maybe supposed to send a message to the other states.

But support isn't monolithic, or probably even great among most people so still not sure exactly why it's so extremely strong. There are plenty of American Jews who are as critical of Israel as any others (well, except for the idiotic anti-semitic folks). One of the first pro-Palestine, anti-separation wall site I found on the internet was the NYC Jews Against the Occupation (http://www.jatonyc.org The site seems defunct now, but the info/resources is still worthy of reference). And there are other such organizations like Jews For a Free Palestine: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6768

I think I've seen polls indicating US jews tend to be pretty liberal. Overall I'm with you, it's a bit baffling. And I think we far, far overvalue and overspend on our relationship with Israel, both in $$$ and in foreign policy blowback. What particularly irks me is when we put forth an equitable peace plan or steps to negotiation, and Israel bolloxes it all up with an IDF bulldozing incursion or assassination of a Palestinian terrorist leader. Often they draw first blood in these situations--the Palestinians haven't yet breeched their part of the agreement first. If we're going to sacrifice so much for them they should get in line with our policies and initiatives. That they don't and our leaders continue to praise the relationship is maddening.

I like Israel and hope it thrives, but what we've done is enabling. If we cut off funding (including emergency funding like that $18b a few years back), perhaps they'd be more inclined to want a lasting peace. As is, they know they'll always have the strongest military, and any financial set-backs they have from wall-building, IDF checkpoints and patrols, etc. will be reimbursed by my government. ARGH.

[Oliver]

It does not hurt Israel's case that the current crop of enemies of our republic have been the enemies of Israel for some time.


Huh? How was Iraq an enemy of the US?
How is Iran an enemy of the US?
How is Afghanistan an enemy of the US or Israel?

[Oliver]

Also: As the 9/11 commission report [and Osama] points out, the close
connection and policies between the US and Israel actually draw anger
towards the US.

[Dragoonster]

Huh? How was Iraq an enemy of the US?
How is Iran an enemy of the US?
How is Afghanistan an enemy of the US or Israel?

Iraq has been friend/enemy/neutral/friend/enemy/invaded, lately Axis of Evil member
Iran has been neutral/enemy/friend/enemy/friend/enemy, lately Axis of Evil member
Afghanistan has been neutral/friend/neutral/enemy/invaded

I think I got those orders right, hard to keep up over the years and whims of our foreign policy

All have been nominally or actively anti-Israel through history. So yeah, Cylinder has a point.

ETA: I'll leave the digs in against our foreign policy, but no more of that from me, don't want to derail the thread.

[andyandy]

I'm not sure, fellow orang.

A very interesting post, thank you.

Orangutans for a more equitable Israeli policy. :D

[Dragoonster]

A very interesting post, thank you.

Orangutans for a more equitable Israeli policy. :D

lol! Go OFAMEIP!! :D

[Crowlogic]

The answer is very simple. We have a significantly high population of Jews in several of our most important cities in many of our most important professions. This is not a bad thing either in most cases. Now we have Isreal and whether one supports the manner in which Isreal was created it nevertheless is of vital concern to that Jewish population I mentioned earlier. Now by no small coincidence Isreal is stragetically located and armed to the teeth. The Palistinian issue notwithstanding Isreal is one of the few countries in the Middle East that operates in a Western modality that we can understand and that will align with our social/political position.

Isreal is the dissonant element, it is the one piece of the jigsaw puzzle of the Middle East that can't be assimilated into the rest of the Middle East. It is the one thing that prevents the Middle East from forging a unified anti Western front.

[Oliver]

Isreal is the one thing that prevents the Middle East from forging a unified anti Western front.


Good one. :D

[HereticHulk]

It is a purely religious reason IMO.

Jews are 'Gods chosen people'. Hooey!

[Thunder]

1. Holocaust guilt.

2. Bilbical associations with Israel, the Jews, Jesus, etc.

3. End times armagedon coming of Christ nonsense.

4. Jewish-American lobbying. (just like Cuban-American lobbying and the Cuba embargo)

5. Prejudice against Arabs and Muslims.

6. Believing that the Jews deserve their own state in Palestine.

[Crowlogic]

It is a purely religious reason IMO.

Jews are 'Gods chosen people'. Hooey!

Hooey is right there is no god to choose Jews or otherwise!

[Skeptic]

I ask this question with some trepidation given the subject, but it is something which I don't really understand. Listening to the two presidential candidates falling over themselves to profess how important the relationship with Israel is, the question to ask is why?

Sure, Israel is a democracy and in a region with the likes of Syria and Iran is a natural ally. But just being an ally does not explain the level of bilateral relations between the two nations which exceed those Israel relations of just about every other western democracy.

True. But Israel, unlike any other western deocracy, is officially--and practically--not only opposed, but doomed to destruction and genocide, by its barbatic enemies, such as Syria, Libya, Iran, Palestinian terrorists, etc. This is not the case with, say, France.

The greater the threat, the stronger the need to protect it, and therefore the stronger the alliance. Think of it in the same way Western Germany of all nations had many more US troops during the cold war than any other European nation.

This is hardly due to Germany being the most democratic, or historically just, or human-right respecting, of all nations (for obvious reasons); but Germany *was* the closest to the Eastern block and therefore the most immediatelly threathened by it.

[Dragoonster]

True. But Israel, unlike any other western deocracy, is officially--and practically--not only opposed, but doomed to destruction and genocide, by its barbatic enemies, such as Syria, Libya, Iran, Palestinian terrorists, etc. This is not the case with, say, France.

The greater the threat, the stronger the need to protect it, and therefore the stronger the alliance. Think of it in the same way Western Germany of all nations had many more US troops during the cold war than any other European nation.

This is hardly due to Germany being the most democratic, or historically just, or human-right respecting, of all nations (for obvious reasons); but Germany *was* the closest to the Eastern block and therefore the most immediatelly threathened by it.

Why then has the US never (or very rarely) stationed troops in Israel, nor ever (or very rarely) aided Israel militarily during the Six Day's War, Yom Kippur War, Lebanon War, War of Independence, or other altercations? Why does the relationship not have an automatic defense agreement as NATO has? Why is the aid to thwart the threat much greater than the aid when the threat became reality?

The only answers that jump to mind is that Israel was strong enough to defend itself without our military aid, in which case they weren't really threatened. Or that the conflicts were over quickly enough for any of our forces not to have a chance to intervene (but I think there were some US forces in the areas at the beginning of many of the wars and mostly observed).

I'm not trying to play here, I'm genuinely curious and don't know. It's a really weird alliance.

[Puppycow]

Starting with the OP:

Start with the numbers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population). Six million or 39% of the world's Jews live in the US (slightly more than in Israel and much more than in the 3rd ranked country, Russia, where less than 1 million Jews live.

Next consider that while Jews represent only 2% of the US population, they account for 4% of the vote, so they are more politically active than average Americans. More than that, IIRC, I recently read an article that said they account for about one fifth of political donations (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1024600.html). If true, that means they donate 10 times more per capita to politicians than the average American.

Then there are other reasons, such as our shared history as allies and the fact that the US fought the Nazis in WW2.

Why then has the US never (or very rarely) stationed troops in Israel, nor ever (or very rarely) aided Israel militarily during the Six Day's War, Yom Kippur War, Lebanon War, War of Independence, or other altercations? Why does the relationship not have an automatic defense agreement as NATO has? Why is the aid to thwart the threat much greater than the aid when the threat became reality?

The only answers that jump to mind is that Israel was strong enough to defend itself without our military aid, in which case they weren't really threatened. Or that the conflicts were over quickly enough for any of our forces not to have a chance to intervene (but I think there were some US forces in the areas at the beginning of many of the wars and mostly observed).

I'm not trying to play here, I'm genuinely curious and don't know. It's a really weird alliance.

Our military aid has mstly been in the form of equipment I believe, not boots on the ground. The Israeli Army is one of the best there is (the best for a country of comparable size) and they don't tend to need our help, other than equipment. If they did need it, then I bet we would help with troops too if it came to that.

[Puppycow]

I had to run out in the middle of post #18, but I may have just been scratching the surface with the numbers I mentioned so far. We haven't even got to Teh Sooper Sekrit Plot By Joos Two Controll All Teh Leavers Of Power. ;)

But seriously, there's more, although I may be treading on thin ground. Like the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain, the Jews in America reside mainly in New York. About 3.5 million of them. What else is in New York? A lot of important stuff, like the three big television networks, Wall Street, and other stuff. I also hear that there's a lot of Jews in Hollywood. Mayor Bloomberg of New York is an obvious example of a very rich and powerful Jew from New York. So, just as the average American Jew is more likely to vote and to contribute to politics than the average American, he/she is also more likely to be rich, powerful and influential than the average American.

Then there's the possibility that Jews are smarter on average than the rest of us (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_intelligence). In addition evidence from IQ tests, the Jews seem to be overrepresented in Science. Einstein and Carl Sagan are two examples. Bob Dylan. There's many Nobel Prizewinners too. So the social and scientific influence of Jews cannot be measured by numbers alone.

So, while one who only looks at the bad side of things might look at this situation at say "Oh Noes, our country is run by Joos! And we're tied at the hip to Israel!" I think tha the benefits to America far outweigh the costs. Because Jonas Salk's Jewish parents immigrated to America, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Salk) we were the first to get the polio vaccine. Also, we were the first to get nulear weapons and to put a man on the moon. I'm pretty sure that Jewish scientists made great contributions in many areas, and that the US benefitted from that. While it may just be a coincidence, we had more Jews than Russia, and guess who won the Cold War? Also, we have the world's biggest economy as well as the world's largest poulation of Jews (again, it could be a coincidence).

Anyway, that's why I'm pro-semitic. The benefits outweigh the costs.

[Skeptic]

You're looking for logical consistency from racists, puppycow -- that is, you expect them to realize that if (a) America is ruled by the Jews, and (b) America is the greatest country in the world, then they should be *glad* it is ruled by the Jews, not angry about it.

But of course, if they were logical, they wouldn't be racists, would they?

[MaGZ]

Maybe I'm completely overestimating the influence of AIPAC and other
Pro-Israeli Lobbies, but I also found no other explanation other than
Israel being a [rather small] geo-strategical advantage for the US.

Could you please explain what that geo-strategical advantage is? It seems to me Saudi Arabia or Iran would provide a better advantage to the US than Israel.

[Oliver]

Could you please explain what that geo-strategical advantage is? It seems to me Saudi Arabia or Iran would provide a better advantage to the US than Israel.


Israel, according to what I read, was a geo-political advantage during the
cold war era, But don't ask me why that was the case - or why Israel
still is an advantage concerning the ME.

[MaGZ]

That's a very complex question. The history of the US ties to Israel lies in a hedge against the expansion of Soviet influence in the Southwest Asia. I suspect it was also aided by demographic and political realities in the aftermath of WWII.

By that, I mean that the US retained intact Jewish political organizations that were largely dismantled throughout Europe and for US citizens not really affected by Jewish issues there was a great groundswell of support in the wake of the terrible realization of the scope of the holocaust. Of course, these events coincided with the ascendancy of US power worldwide.

Today, Israel retains much of the benefits of that special relationship that was forged during the Cold War. I think, too, that the memory of the holocaust still fuels support for voters not really affected by Jewish concerns. It does not hurt Israel's case that the current crop of enemies of our republic have been the enemies of Israel for some time.

Maybe they are our enemies because we are allied with Israel. Did you ever think of that?

[Puppycow]

You're looking for logical consistency from racists, puppycow -- that is, you expect them to realize that if (a) America is ruled by the Jews, and (b) America is the greatest country in the world, then they should be *glad* it is ruled by the Jews, not angry about it.

But of course, if they were logical, they wouldn't be racists, would they?

Yes. I don't expect hardcore racists to understand. I hope that those capable of understanding would understand. Envy and zero-sum thinking may be remnants of our evolutionary heritage which have outlived their usefulness. Perhaps they will gradually fade away now that they are no longer useful. But that will take some time.

[Thunder]

Maybe they are our enemies because we are allied with Israel. Did you ever think of that?

thats it? Israel? thats the only reason?

give me a break.

how about 100 years of sticking our noses in their business? how about dividing up their lands....stealing their oil.....overthrowing democratically elected regimes..etc etc.

israel is part of the problem...but only part.

[MaGZ]

Israel, according to what I read, was a geo-political advantage during the
cold war era, But don't ask me why that was the case - or why Israel
still is an advantage concerning the ME.

The Cold War argument fails. Back in the 1950’s Israel was closer to France and the communist state of Czechoslovakia than it was to the US.

[MaGZ]

True. But Israel, unlike any other western deocracy, is officially--and practically--not only opposed, but doomed to destruction and genocide, by its barbatic enemies, such as Syria, Libya, Iran, Palestinian terrorists, etc. This is not the case with, say, France.

The greater the threat, the stronger the need to protect it, and therefore the stronger the alliance. Think of it in the same way Western Germany of all nations had many more US troops during the cold war than any other European nation.

This is hardly due to Germany being the most democratic, or historically just, or human-right respecting, of all nations (for obvious reasons); but Germany *was* the closest to the Eastern block and therefore the most immediatelly threathened by it.

How can all the might of the Arab or Islamic nations in the Middle East be a great threat to Israel?

You do know the balance of power there, don’t you?

[MaGZ]

Why then has the US never (or very rarely) stationed troops in Israel, nor ever (or very rarely) aided Israel militarily during the Six Day's War, Yom Kippur War, Lebanon War, War of Independence, or other altercations? Why does the relationship not have an automatic defense agreement as NATO has? Why is the aid to thwart the threat much greater than the aid when the threat became reality?

The only answers that jump to mind is that Israel was strong enough to defend itself without our military aid, in which case they weren't really threatened. Or that the conflicts were over quickly enough for any of our forces not to have a chance to intervene (but I think there were some US forces in the areas at the beginning of many of the wars and mostly observed).

I'm not trying to play here, I'm genuinely curious and don't know. It's a really weird alliance.

Nixon saved Israel’s ass in the Yom Kippur War. He stripped NATO bare and sent the equipment behind Israel’s lines. Likewise when Israel got stuck in Lebanon our Marines went in to solve the problem Israel created. Remember the barracks bombing?

[MaGZ]

I had to run out in the middle of post #18, but I may have just been scratching the surface with the numbers I mentioned so far. We haven't even got to Teh Sooper Sekrit Plot By Joos Two Controll All Teh Leavers Of Power. ;)

But seriously, there's more, although I may be treading on thin ground. Like the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain, the Jews in America reside mainly in New York. About 3.5 million of them. What else is in New York? A lot of important stuff, like the three big television networks, Wall Street, and other stuff. I also hear that there's a lot of Jews in Hollywood. Mayor Bloomberg of New York is an obvious example of a very rich and powerful Jew from New York. So, just as the average American Jew is more likely to vote and to contribute to politics than the average American, he/she is also more likely to be rich, powerful and influential than the average American.

Then there's the possibility that Jews are smarter on average than the rest of us (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_intelligence). In addition evidence from IQ tests, the Jews seem to be overrepresented in Science. Einstein and Carl Sagan are two examples. Bob Dylan. There's many Nobel Prizewinners too. So the social and scientific influence of Jews cannot be measured by numbers alone.

So, while one who only looks at the bad side of things might look at this situation at say "Oh Noes, our country is run by Joos! And we're tied at the hip to Israel!" I think tha the benefits to America far outweigh the costs. Because Jonas Salk's Jewish parents immigrated to America, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Salk) we were the first to get the polio vaccine. Also, we were the first to get nulear weapons and to put a man on the moon. I'm pretty sure that Jewish scientists made great contributions in many areas, and that the US benefitted from that. While it may just be a coincidence, we had more Jews than Russia, and guess who won the Cold War? Also, we have the world's biggest economy as well as the world's largest poulation of Jews (again, it could be a coincidence).

Anyway, that's why I'm pro-semitic. The benefits outweigh the costs.

For every Jonas Salk there is a Jonathan Pollard or Julius Rosenberg.

[Ziggurat]

Sure, Israel is a democracy and in a region with the likes of Syria and Iran is a natural ally. But just being an ally does not explain the level of bilateral relations between the two nations which exceed those Israel relations of just about every other western democracy. Indeed, it is probably within America's strategic national interest to not be seen as closely aligned with Israel as it currently is.

A close alliance with Israel has basically ensured peace between Israel and its neighbors for over three decades now. And that has helped make sure that oil exports from the middle east are not interrupted by war. The security benefits of that should be obvious. It also gives us considerable influence with other countries in the region: if they're upset about something Israel is doing, they have to come to us to get us to reign in Israel, because Israel will listen to us precisely because we benefit them so much.

[Ivor the Engineer]

<snip>

...Jews are smarter on average than the rest of us...

<snip>

Yeah, but are they smarter than the former NAZI scientists who helped the US win the space race?:)

[Puppycow]

Yeah, but are they smarter than the former NAZI scientists who helped the US win the space race?:)

Non sequitor. Apples and oranges. NAZI scientists are not a distinct ethnic group.

[Ivor the Engineer]

Non sequitor. Apples and oranges. NAZI scientists are not a distinct ethnic group.

My point was that American policy is simply to win. It really doesn't matter about the means. Hence the ability of those who have power in the US to overlook or rewrite the history of those people/countries who/which are considered to provide them with an advantage.

BTW, white men are over-represented in top jobs. Are they smarter than non-white women, or are there other factors at play?

[Puppycow]

My point was that American policy is simply to win. It really doesn't matter about the means. Hence the ability of those who have power in the US to overlook or rewrite the history of those people/countries who/which are considered to provide them with an advantage.

BTW, white men are over-represented in top jobs. Are they smarter than non-white women, or are there other factors at play?

Off topic.

[Ivor the Engineer]

Off topic.

So is coming out with questionable statements of fact such as "Jews are smarter on average than the rest of us".

Let's call it a draw.;)

[Puppycow]

So is coming out with questionable statements of fact such as "Jews are smarter on average than the rest of us".

Let's call it a draw.;)

You're twisting my words, I said it was a 'possibility' not a 'fact.'

Offer of draw accepted. ;)

[Dragoonster]

You're looking for logical consistency from racists, puppycow -- that is, you expect them to realize that if (a) America is ruled by the Jews, and (b) America is the greatest country in the world, then they should be *glad* it is ruled by the Jews, not angry about it.

But of course, if they were logical, they wouldn't be racists, would they?

You aren't being very logical either. If the above were true I'd be glad Jews ran the country. You could also replace "Jews" with "Muslims" or "Capitalists" or "Muppets".

But your premises are false. First, "influence" does not = "rule". Second, in the real world "greatest" doesn't mean it's great in every policy. I like Jews just fine and plenty of them have done great things for America, but the argument could be made that the "Jewish influence" has led to those parts of policy that are not "great". That's very simplistic of course, just pointing out that your logic is faulty.

I don't think the argument should weigh every positive/negative thing from their contribution. As I pointed out there are American Jews with completely contradictory ideologies to other American Jews.

Finally, any and all of my disagreements with Israeli policies are targeted towards some parts of the Israeli government, almost entirely concerning the Occupied Territories. Not Jews. They could all be Buddhists and if they were doing the same things I'd have a problem with them. And yeah, I have a problem with the Iranian government, the Sudanese government, the Saudi government, etc. I had a big problem with our alliance with the Saudis, and currently a big problem with the Pakistani alliance. I could care less what American Muslims have done for our country when it comes to my disagreement with aid to those countries. Has nothing to do with ethnicity or religion of either those states or here domestically, but the practices of their governments.

IMO until there's a final resolution to the occupation, we should withhold all aid to both Israel and the OT. I wouldn't mind a defense pact with Israel, but general aid has enabled the problem far too long.

[Thunder]

The fact remains that the amount AIPAC and other Jewish organizations donate to yearly election campaigns is miniscule compared to other groups like the AARP and industrial interests. We can therefore assume that the reasoning behind America's love of Israel is based on political, ethnic, and religous ideology.

[Oliver]

The fact remains that the amount AIPAC and other Jewish organizations donate to yearly election campaigns is miniscule compared to other groups like the AARP and industrial interests. We can therefore assume that the reasoning behind America's love of Israel is based on political, ethnic, and religous ideology.


There is also the rumor that AIPAC and similar Lobbies will go after
any political or social public figure that opposes their view, trying
to smear those people using the "Anti-Semite"-card.

I remember that was the case regarding the Walt&Mersheimer thing.
No Idea if this is a general smear-policy of the Lobbies - or Members
of the Lobbies.

[Ziggurat]

There is also the rumor that AIPAC and similar Lobbies will go after
any political or social public figure that opposes their view,

And in Oliverland, rumor is an adequate substitute for evidence.

[Oliver]

And in Oliverland, rumor is an adequate substitute for evidence.


What rumor? :confused:

[Ziggurat]

What rumor? :confused:

Short-term memory problems there, Oliver?

There is also the rumor that AIPAC and similar Lobbies will go after
any political or social public figure that opposes their view, trying
to smear those people using the "Anti-Semite"-card.

[Almo]

Often [the Israelis] draw first blood in these situations--the Palestinians haven't yet breeched their part of the agreement first.

Is this true? Anyone want to post counter-examples?

[Almo]

But Israel, unlike any other western deocracy, is officially--and practically--not only opposed, but doomed to destruction and genocide, by its barbatic enemies, such as Syria, Libya, Iran, Palestinian terrorists, etc. This is not the case with, say, France.

If they're doomed to destruction, they're not going to change that situation by antagonizing the people whose land they're sitting on.

I've said it before. Israel has the upper hand when it comes to force, so they should take the moral high ground and stop transgressing international law. Should aggression against them continue, then there will be much more sympathy for them around the world.

[Polaris]

thats it? Israel? thats the only reason?

give me a break.

how about 100 years of sticking our noses in their business? how about dividing up their lands....stealing their oil.....overthrowing democratically elected regimes..etc etc.

israel is part of the problem...but only part.

Which democratic regime was overthrown in Saudi Arabia?

And with gasoline frequently approaching and occasionally topping $4 a gallon, who's the thief? Last time I checked, Middle Eastern oil is paid for handsomely - not our fault the profits go to perfumed princes and Wahhabi terrorists/madrassas instead of ordinary folks.

[Oliver]

Short-term memory problems there, Oliver?


It's no rumor. It's actually part of the Lobbies job. One big ProIsrael-Public Relation Party. :p

[Ziggurat]

It's no rumor.

Then why did YOU call it a rumor? I know English isn't your first language, but really, you don't even need to know the definition of the word to realize that you're contradicting yourself here.

[The Fool]

True. But Israel, unlike any other western deocracy, is officially--and practically--not only opposed, but doomed to destruction and genocide, by its barbatic enemies, such as Syria, Libya, Iran, Palestinian terrorists, etc. This is not the case with, say, France.


10 bucks says Israel would blow them all to bits.....what odds will you give me?

Honestly Skeptic...this is simply wild fearmongering used to excuse whatever actions you wish....the party line being that Unless Israel is allowed to do whatever there will be a second Holocaust.

I don't think so....Your defence forces....you....and hundreds of thousands like you in Israel would use your Military power to decimate the surrounding "barbarians".

[Thunder]

Which democratic regime was overthrown in Saudi Arabia?

And with gasoline frequently approaching and occasionally topping $4 a gallon, who's the thief? Last time I checked, Middle Eastern oil is paid for handsomely - not our fault the profits go to perfumed princes and Wahhabi terrorists/madrassas instead of ordinary folks.

we overthrew the regime in Iran. we supported and propped up ruthless dictators in Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. we broke promises again and again with the Middle East. we stole their oil. we preach democracy yet cater to authoritarians and bigots.

[Thunder]

Is this true? Anyone want to post counter-examples?

sure..i will. the palestinians launched a 2nd intifada after Bibi broke a hole in a wall.

so, jews smack holes in walls, arabs respond with murder and bloodshed.

[Ziggurat]

we overthrew the regime in Iran.

No, we did not. It's amazing how resistant this lie is to correction, but that is not what happened. We sided with one of two existing factions within Iran (namely the Shah) against another one (the Prime Minister Mossadegh). But the Shah was already the Shah, and though it may have been the wrong thing to do, helping to remove Mossadegh (who was originally appointed by the Shah) cannot be considered overthrowing the regime of Iran.

[Thunder]

No, we did not. It's amazing how resistant this lie is to correction, but that is not what happened. We sided with one of two existing factions within Iran (namely the Shah) against another one (the Prime Minister Mossadegh). But the Shah was already the Shah, and though it may have been the wrong thing to do, helping to remove Mossadegh (who was originally appointed by the Shah) cannot be considered overthrowing the regime of Iran.

The United States supported and assisted in the forced removal of a democratically elected leader of Iran, because we thought he would be more supportive of Socialism.

Had we not done this, Iran today may have been a social-democratic society.

[moon1969]

Same reason why it is to Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia and USA also supports the government of Lebanon and USA got no problems with Libya and Muammar al-Gaddafi ah and USA also supports Pakistan and Afghanistan. Yeah its the joos. AIPAC so powerful even if USA supports an arab state like Kuwait, Qatar or Yemen. Ah and USA got no problems with Turkey or kurds. Could it be that Israel is a small country surrounded by hostile nations?

[Ziggurat]

Had we not done this, Iran today may have been a social-democratic society.

Like I said: it may well have been a mistake, but it cannot be accurately characterized as overthrowing a regime. There are lots of "ifs" regarding Iran. If we had been more supportive of the Shah, the 1979 revolution might not have succeeded. So the idea that everything would be fine if we just butt out doesn't really make much sense either.

[Dragoonster]

Like I said: it may well have been a mistake, but it cannot be accurately characterized as overthrowing a regime. There are lots of "ifs" regarding Iran. If we had been more supportive of the Shah, the 1979 revolution might not have succeeded. So the idea that everything would be fine if we just butt out doesn't really make much sense either.

If we hadn't overthrown Mossadeq he almost certainly would've continued his democratic progress, putting more power into an elected PM, without the Shah in a position that he could've resisted and moved to authoritarian rule. The opposite occurred, and allowed for a nearly-equally unsavory opposition to come to rule after '79. I'd say that counts as regime-overthrowing, as well as a massive mistake.

Is this true? Anyone want to post counter-examples?

I didn't phrase that well. The Palestinians certainly have breached the peace process, more than the Israelis. My point was that our policy is a 2-state solution, we give each side funds (until Hamas), and breaching by either side is unacceptable if what we have with them, particularly Israel, is a true quid pro quo alliance.

Portions of both sides willfully upset the peace processes, because extending the conflict plays into their political power and their radical positions. This should be punished by the US via completel withdrawal of military/economic aid. Not simply punished by empty rhetoric while still pumping money to them.

[Polaris]

we overthrew the regime in Iran. we supported and propped up ruthless dictators in Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. we broke promises again and again with the Middle East. we stole their oil. we preach democracy yet cater to authoritarians and bigots.

Ziggurat has already tackled the "overthrew the regime in Iran" thing, but beyond that, which democratic regime has been toppled in the Middle East due to the actions of the United States?

And I'm still waiting for your evidence that "we stole their oil". Seems to me tha oil wealth is the only thing that is keeping the Middle East from completely reverting to unrestained religious warfare, persecution of minorities and women, and tribal butchery (and it's not that far from that now as it is).

[Ziggurat]

If we hadn't overthrown Mossadeq he almost certainly would've continued his democratic progress, putting more power into an elected PM

Mossadegh definitely tried to shift power away from the Shah. But he was hardly a democrat. He managed to get the power to create laws on his own, and when faced with serious opposition, he disolved parliament (which he had no constitutional authority to do) and got himself re-elected in a vote which did NOT use secret ballots (which was also a constitutional requirement). That's not the work of a democrat, that's the work of an autocrat. There is not much reason to think that Mossadegh would really have created a more democratic Iran, or that he ever believed in democracy as anything beyond a means to personal power, to be discarded when inconvenient.

[davefoc]

There are broadly two kinds of theories about the reasons for US Israel policies.

1. It is in the general US interest and the American political leadership understands that when it implements the US Israel policy.

2. It is the result of various interest groups that drive a US policy that is against the general US interest. Underlying this possibility is the fact that US policies as the policies of most democracies are often driven more by special interests than general interests.

Ziggurat and Skeptic attempted to make the case for the first possibility. I think they are substantially wrong in their judgment.

Parky76's list seemed pretty good to me:

1. Holocaust guilt.

2. Bilbical associations with Israel, the Jews, Jesus, etc.

3. End times armagedon coming of Christ nonsense.

4. Jewish-American lobbying. (just like Cuban-American lobbying and the Cuba embargo)

5. Prejudice against Arabs and Muslims.

6. Believing that the Jews deserve their own state in Palestine.

I would quibble with the order and Parky76 didn't include the AIPAC lobbying efforts which were noted in other places in this thread.

I think he also missed a couple of very important elements that drive the US Israel policy:

1. The military industrial complex. Israel is a double bonus for military suppliers. The US buys several billion dollars of weapons a year and gives them to Israel or it gives Israel the money and Israel buys the weapons. Then other countries, especially in the middle east, decide that they want the same cool stuff that Israel is getting and this drives a market for US weapons from countries that actually pay for them. There is another little bonus here in that Israel will sell weapons to countries that the US won't sell to directly and that leads to even more US weapon sales.

2. Jingoistic momentum. People like to think that the policies of their leaders are good. They don't like the idea that their money has been wasted or that the policies of their leaders have made things worse. The US has provided billions of dollars to Israel and it has almost always sided with Israel against the Palestinians. It is just more pleasing for Americans to think that the policies of their country are on the side of good and those people that oppose the US policies are on the side of evil. A change of US policy would challenge Americans views about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.