15
   

ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

 
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 10:10 am
@Advocate,
Quote:
What are you saying?


This and only this, Advocate;

Without the billions in aid that they've received over the years, the country Israel, would be already forgotten.

Don't be making silly guesses.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 10:17 am
re, ican: Israel, despite its small population has been the number one recipient of American military and foreign aid, pretty much since its founding, if I remember correctly. the West Bank and Gaza, on the other hand, get about two percent, that's 2%, as much aid as Israel. Not exactly even-handed.
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 10:29 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:

re, ican: Israel, despite its small population has been the number one recipient of American military and foreign aid, pretty much since its founding, if I remember correctly. the West Bank and Gaza, on the other hand, get about two percent, that's 2%, as much aid as Israel. Not exactly even-handed.


As I said before, we have gotten a great return on the money loaned (mostly) to Israel. Egypt receives almost as much, but the USA gets little back for this. Aid should not be even-handed. Why would we give more to Pals, who run terroristic organizations? Do you suggest we give money to Iran? Israel is the only free country in the ME, and is a great ally of the USA.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 10:34 am
@Advocate,
Excuse me, 'loaned?' Where did you come up with that bullshit?

Israel has never returned a dollar of the direct and military aid that we've given them, and their actions actively make life more difficult for us.

Israel would have no legitimacy if we didn't back them up; without our military and direct aid, they would not have won their wars and wouldn't even HAVE a country. Israel was not created because the Jews fought and won the land, or had any real legitimate claim to the land; it was created to solve a problem, and at the will of the US.

Cycloptichorn
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 10:44 am
@Advocate,
Quote:
As I said before, we have gotten a great return on the money loaned (mostly) to Israel.


Quote:
Repaid A US Loan
From [email protected]
11-27-2

An AP story has just come out on aid to Israel, and along with several other problems, it contains a sentence that we should all call our newspapers to correct. I have just called AP itself, and asked them to correct the story. In case they don't, please call your local newspapers and ask them to give more accurate information, as follows:

In its current report, AP says that Israel has never defaulted on a loan. The real fact is that ISRAEL HAS NEVER REPAID A LOAN. THE MONEY NEVER RETURNS TO THE US TREASURY.


I gave AP the following reference: an excellent article by longtime journalist and executive editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, Richard Curtiss:


"...friends of Israel never tire of saying that Israel has never defaulted on repayment of a U.S. government loan. It would be equally accurate to say Israel has never been required to repay a U.S. government loan. The truth of the matter is complex, and designed to be so by those who seek to conceal it from the U.S. taxpayer.

Most U.S. loans to Israel are forgiven, and many were made with the explicit understanding that they would be forgiven before Israel was required to repay them. By disguising as loans what in fact were grants, cooperating members of Congress exempted Israel from the U.S. oversight that would have accompanied grants. On other loans, Israel was expected to pay the interest and eventually to begin repaying the principal. But the so-called Cranston Amendment, which has been attached by Congress to every foreign aid appropriation since 1983, provides that economic aid to Israel will never dip below the amount Israel is required to pay on its outstanding loans. In short, whether U.S. aid is extended as grants or loans to Israel, it never returns to the Treasury."

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/1297/9712043.html

If the newspapers say that the AP contention that Israel "never defaulted on a loan" is not incorrect, you might want to mention John Stuart Mill's observation that the greater evil is not the violent conflict of parts of the truth, "but the quiet suppression of half of it."

http://www.rense.com/general32/never.htm


What the USA gets for this money is a country willing to vote against UN resolutions pointing out USA terrorist actions against any number of countries?

The hypocrisy of all this terrorist finger pointing is simply amazing. The USA was founded on terrorist actions against the legitimate government of the day.

On the planet now, there is no greater terrorist country than the United States of America.

Israel runs terrorist organizations too.
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 11:37 am
@JTT,
You and Advocate are a match made in heaven.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 11:53 am
@rabel22,
Can't address the issues so a diversionary tactic is in order, eh, Rabel?
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 12:30 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:


Israel would have no legitimacy if we didn't back them up; without our military and direct aid, they would not have won their wars and wouldn't even HAVE a country. Israel was not created because the Jews fought and won the land, or had any real legitimate claim to the land; it was created to solve a problem, and at the will of the US.

Cycloptichorn


The problems that were solved with the creation of Israel was:
1) Where to put the survivors of the Final Solution, since anti-Semitism was intractable in much of continental Europe.
2) Prevent a resurgence of Naziism in de-Nazified Europe by putting the persona non grata survivors of the Final Solution elsewhere.
3) Maintain a balance of power during the Cold War in the Middle East, since the Soviet Union would have dominated the Middle East without Israel as a counter-balance.
4) Get some of the oil money back into circulation with the western powers by making Israel the reason Arab countries needed to buy weapon systems.
5) Maintain the profit margin of some U.S. defense industries, by having American monetary aid used by Israel for armaments, aircraft, etc.

It appears to me that the reasons for Israel's existence have been sort of self-serving. Giving the Jews a supposed safe haven from anti-Semitism has not really proven correct, since Israel has fought four wars to survive. The only difference is that Muslim Arabs were now the Jew hunters, not Europeans. If it was not so pathetic, it might even have a touch or irony.

If Jews do not have a legitimate claim to Israel, then perhaps English speaking Californians should start speaking Spanish - pronto!
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 12:59 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
Another interpretation is that the Obama administration has decided to meddle in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation. Also, how does the international community get the ethical right to be concerned about a future capitol of a Palestinian state, when that land is part of another nation?

If East Jerusalem is really not part of Israel, perhaps that should be stated, rather than the attempt to not ruffle any feathers in Israel. Straight confrontation might then show both parties for their divergent agendas?


The international community gets the ethical right to be concerned about a future capitol of a Palestinian state because Israel, in part, uses the pretext of international sanction--namely, UN resolution 181--for their existence. Conversely, the international community, in part, points to UN resolution 242, and the so called "Road Map" it devised in an attempt to resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. The land that you claim is part of another nation is actually in contention between the two sides of this conflict, Israeli suppositions notwithstanding. As had been agreed to by both sides in their acceptance of the Road Map, this land's fate is to be decided in future negotiations.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 02:57 pm
WHO REALLY OWNS WHAT LAND IN PALESTINE?
An abbreviated chronology of onership of the land now called Palestine (all years are approximate).
The Encyclopedia Britannica, under the topic, Palestine, wrote:

8000 BC: First building structures.
7000 BC: First Jerico fortifications.
2000 BC: First Canaanite Culture.
1400 BC: Eqypt conquers Palestine
...
1300 BC: First Israelite Culture.
...
1100 BC: First Philistine Culture (Philistra, evolved to the name Palestine).
...
1000 BC: Saul King of Israel (all Palestine except Philistra and Phoenicia).
950 BC: Solomon King of Israel.
721 BC: Israel Destroyed, but Judaea Continues.
...
333 BC: Greeks Conquer Palestine.
...
161 BC: Jews Conquer Palestine .
...
40 BC: Romans Conquer Palestine.
...
640 AD: Arabs conquer Palestine.
...
1099 AD: European Crusaders conquer Palestine.
...
1187 AD: Persians Conquer Palestine.
...
1244 AD: Turks Conquer Palestine.
...
1831 AD: Egypt Conquers Palestine.
1841 AD: Turks Again Conquer Palestine.
1915 AD: British Ambassador to Egypt Promises Palestine to Arabs.
1917 AD: British Foreign Minister Balfour Promises Palestine to Zionists.
1918 AD: British Begin Protectorate of Palestine.
1920 AD: 5 Jews killed, 200 wounded, in anti-zionist riots in Palestine.
1921 AD: 46 Jews killed, 146 wounded, in anti-zionist riots in Palestine.
1929 AD: 133 Jews killed, 339 wounded, in anti-zionist riots in Palestine.
1929 AD: 116 Arabs killed, 232 wounded, in anti-zionist riots in Palestine.
...
1936 - 1938 AD: 329 Jews killed, 857 wounded, in anti-zionist riots in Palestine.
1936 - 1938 AD: 3,112 Arabs killed, 1,775 wounded, in anti-zionist riots in Palestine.
1936 - 1938 AD: 135 British killed, 386 wounded, in anti-zionist riots in Palestine.
1936 - 1938 AD: 110 Arabs hanged, 5,679 jailed, by British.
...
1947 AD: UN resolution recommends partitioning of Palestine into Jewish and Arab States.
1948 AD: Jews declare independent state of Israel.
1948 AD: War breaks out between Jews and Arabs in Palestine.
1948 AD: State of Israel conquers part of Palestine.
...
1967 AD: Israel pre-empting an attack by Syria, Jordan, and Egypt, conquers more of Palestine.
...

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 04:13 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
1) Where to put the survivors of the Final Solution, since anti-Semitism was intractable in much of continental Europe.

There are no Jews in continental Europe?

2) Prevent a resurgence of Naziism in de-Nazified Europe by putting the persona non grata survivors of the Final Solution elsewhere.

Jews being present in Germany did not cause the rise of Naziism

3) Maintain a balance of power during the Cold War in the Middle East, since the Soviet Union would have dominated the Middle East without Israel as a counter-balance.

I don't think so. None of the middle eastern countries would have been very big on being part of the Soviet empire.

4) Get some of the oil money back into circulation with the western powers by making Israel the reason Arab countries needed to buy weapon systems.

5) Maintain the profit margin of some U.S. defense industries, by having American monetary aid used by Israel for armaments, aircraft, etc.

Now, we're getting somewhere. A place where the US could sell armaments.


It appears to me that the reasons for Israel's existence have been sort of self-serving.


The USA, self-serving, pshawwww.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Mar, 2010 08:43 pm
@JTT,
I was answering the thought by another poster that Israel came into existence to solve a problem. So, what problem was solved by effecting a Zionist state?
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Mar, 2010 12:39 am
@Foofie,
You named the problems pretty well.

As for Californians learning to speak Spanish, all I have to say to that is - let them come, if they think they have what it takes to make it happen.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Mar, 2010 08:08 am
Infra Blue and JTT will be delighted to know that there are Gazans more radically anti-Semitic than are members of Hamas.


Revealing rockets attacks against Israel
Middle Eastern Policy Examiner


On March 18 a rocket from Gaza killed a Thai foreign worker in the southern Israeli town of Netiv Haasara, one of five reported rocket attacks in the last several days. Israel responded by striking at Gaza smuggling tunnels, injuring about a dozen people.

One of the more remarkable, but unremarked, aspects of this affair is that two groups claimed responsibility for the murder: Ansar al Sunna, and the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. One of these claims, both or neither may be true. But the claims themselves remain significant:

First, Ansar al Sunna is a small al Qaeda-affiliated group. The infiltration of Gaza by Islamists who are, incredibly, even more anti-Semitic, bloodthirsty and repulsive than Hamas, is well advanced. Hamas is in danger of losing control of Gaza to these even-more-radical factions. While Hamas is fighting these factions over who rules Gaza, they are united in their desire to destroy Israel. On that score, the differences are over tactics only, with Hamas tending towards pragmatism (after Israel handed it its head in Operation Cast Lead), and the al Qaeda-niks preferring unbuttoned savagery. There may be a question whether Hamas is trying to restrain the al Qaeda-niks, or is outsourcing the rocketing to them for purposes of plausible deniability. Either way, Israel correctly takes the position of holding Hamas responsible, as the de facto government of Gaza.

Second, the al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade is, as Al Jazeera expresses it, "a wing of the mainstream Fatah movement." Fatah is the backbone of the Palestinian Authority. In short, while the PA is negotiating (well, refusing to negotiate) with Israel, it is also engaged in terrorist attacks against Israel. This jaw-dropping duplicity is ignored by Israel, the United States, even the "Israel lobby." But pretending that the PA's al Aqsa Brigade doesn't exist, or doesn't matter, is terribly counterproductive. Rather, Israel and the United States must demand that the al Aqsa Brigade cease to exist--its existence is incompatible with peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. The proper attitude is: the Palestinian Authority cannot maintain a terrorist wing and expect to get anything from Israel.


Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Mar, 2010 01:04 pm
In a SPIEGEL interview, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, 51, discusses his country's controversial settlement policies, the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program and the seeming hopelessness of the conflict with the Palestinians.

'It Is a Clash of Civilizations'

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Mar, 2010 01:21 pm
@Advocate,
If we use the word anti-Palestinian , anti-Iraqi, anti-Afghan, anti-Cuban, ... enough times do you think it's possible that it would surround itself with the same oomph, the same virulence, the same "punch" qualities that anti-Semitic has?

No better way to induce loathing and fear, unreasonable fear, into the hearts and minds of simple-minded Americans that to suggest that someone, just possibly has an uncle who knows someone who thinks that X and X has an in-law to someone who once said they thought there was a connection between some nebulous group and alQaeda.

You know, the Cheney Effect.

It's "ignored by Israel, the US and the Israeli lobby", but we should be all excited.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Mar, 2010 02:02 pm
I know where Lieberman is coming from. Israel has made many valid peace-settlement proposals to the Pals, and they have all been rejected out-of-hand. The Pals have NEVER made a proposal that would not effectively result in the destruction of Israel. Thus, Israel is faced with an implacable enemy to which it is not obliged to make any concessions.
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Mar, 2010 02:12 pm
@Advocate,

Israel continues cheating and murdering Palestinians and stealing their land and their means of support, while presenting itself as a reasonable state offering peace talks.
This fools nobody.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Mar, 2010 02:23 pm

Even America losing patience with Israel

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/21/israel-america-palestine-settlements
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Mar, 2010 05:31 pm
@McTag,


No not "America," but the current administration. Every new administration has its own persona relative to many issues.

Standing in judgement of Israel does not make a logical argument. It just makes an emotional judgement that one may think Israel may be a bad boy. But, tell me how many centuries did Britain treat Ireland like a vassal state? Is it fun to throw stones in a glass house?
 

Related Topics

Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
THE WAR IN GAZA - Discussion by Advocate
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 05/10/2024 at 08:13:39