I'm not being dishonest, I just happen to understand these issues. (1) The fence is a fait accompli which the USA is totally comfortable with privately, but just wants it to stay close to the 67 border. Note that the huge settlement in Ariel (population over 25K) is now on the wrong side of the fence. That was under orders of the USA. (2) Arafat is still in Ramallah. Israel is laying the groundwork for expulsion. Also see: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1063597078733
Its apparent that you understand these issues very well, which is why I'm so disturbed by your dishonesty. Isreal is quite welcome to sneeze upon, and very likely to *#*#*#*# upon, the United States without asking permission, or even having to apologize. Your quotes in your defense serve really only as arguments in my favor. Again: It is time for the United States to have a long, hard talk with Isreal. And it is time for Isreal to listen. It makes no goddamn sense to stage multiple invasions, and to entertain the idea of further invasions, without defusing Al-Queda's #1 recruiting platform. As I said before, I'm not suggesting we sell Isreal up the river, but I am demanding that we explain the situation to them.
Explain what situation to them? "Hey Israel, really sorry 'bout those 16 people that were ruthlessly murdered the other day. But we're going to have to just come out and say this. You are making it hard for us to get along with states that harbor terror. I mean your clear, defined stance against it has put a bullseye on our backs, and we're just not comfortable with that right now. Good luck with that whole terrorism thing."
You may be disturbed, but you haven't addressed either issue. It's obvious that Israel checks with Washington on every major issue. There isn't another country that America controls to such an extent. This happens every day. (1) Al Queda could very well be stronger if there is a peace agreement. (If you really want a peace agreement, get Europe to pressure the Palestinians.) AQ's supporters want Israel destroyed and would see any agreement as traitorous. (2) America does a good enough job getting the Middle East and the rest of world angry without Israel entering the picture. (3) You don't let terrorists dictate your foreign policy.
Contrary to what some people in the US think, Israel most definitely IS a sovereign nation. Sure they consult us on many issues, but we can't tell Israel that they "have to do x, or have to do y." They're under constant seige from Palestinian terrorists. I don't think ramming a wall through Palestinian areas is the brightest idea either. But if they can agree on a border one day with a Palestinian state, then a wall to keep out the nut jobs isn't the worst idea.
CP: "As soon as any nation is attacked by terrorists, that nation gets a blank check to do whatever is necessary to stop the terrorism. That nation becomes completely blameless and innocent. The complaints of the terrorists AND the people they claim to represent are pure nonsense and should be ignored." Sorry, but that attitude will get Israel nowhere.
Israelis and Palestinians have been killing each other for decades. I don't think it's fair to blame only one side.
In case you do not remember history very well, Israel was the country that stopped Iraq from successfully having nuclear grade weaponry. Israel was the country that went out on a limb amid widespread criticism to protect itself and its ally, the US. Israel is the only democracy in that region of the world. Democracy is the type of political system that our leaders believe would be most advantageuos to the US for other countris to undertake. Successful democracies help hinder the rise of dictators like Saddam Hussein that rape, pillage and murder its own citizens. Successful democracies may also help hinder the establishment of terror groups like Hezballah, Al,-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, Hamas, etc.. In case you haven't read the papers lately, Hamas decided to send in suicide bombers to Israel to murder civilians in order to help break a monthlong truce. The people of Hamas have professed that life on this earth does not matter as they will get their reward in heaven for blowing up as many people as possible that do not agree with them. Now, we have Gov. Dean saying that the US should be even handed between Israel and the thugs that stand as the leaders of the Palestinian people. The thugs that would not accept Clinton's offer of 95% of the lands they were seeking 6-7 years ago. Why is Dean's statement so ridiculous? Because he can't tell the difference between outsiders that share our values and outsiders that don't.
Which receives a sizeable amount of its defense budget from the US. And the US has a law that the weapons it sells abroad are not to be used for offensive purposes. And they give back as good as they get. But if they'd pull out of the West Bank they wouldn't have this problem. But Sharon is beholden to the settlers or his cherished ideal of Greater Israel so that ain't gonna happen anytime soon. And the violence will continue round and round. Which is apparently what Sharon wants, according to this Israeli: http://www.counterpunch.org/avnery09152003.html After all, why should Sharon be concerned with a pitiful external Arab attack on Israel? He has 200+ atomic devices, submarines with which to deliver those weapons to any city in the world, as well as biological and chemical weapons. He's arguing from a position of strength. No matter how much the U.S. State Department protests.
> Contrary to what some people in the US think, > Israel most definitely IS a sovereign nation. So they take our money, don't do what we ask, don't provide military bases, and don't provide needed resources of any kind. How are they our "allies"?
because i believe the largest Jewish population on the planet lives in the US and they are a very powerful lobby group.
> In case you do not remember history very well, > Israel was the country that stopped Iraq from > successfully having nuclear grade weaponry. What, a plant that the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency said was in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (which Iraq signed, but Israel has not)? > Israel was the country that went out on a limb > amid widespread criticism to protect itself and its > ally, the US. And we were so happy that we agreed with the UN Security Council vote to condemn Israel. And we were so upset at the Iraqi threat that we went on to give them all sorts of military aid. Oh, yeah, that make sense.
I know you'll find this impossible to comprehend, but sometimes leaders say one thing in public and a different thing in private. Helping Iraq defeat Iran is one thing, wanting them to have nuclear weapons is quite another.
I have absolutely no problem with what Dean said. To be an honest broker of negotiations between the two parties we (by definition) have to be even-handed. Only in this way can we maintain the trust of both sides which is essential to the achievement of an agreement. In fact this is the way we have approached the peace process in Northern Ireland. The British are our staunch allies (even more so than the Israelis) and they have withstood decades of attacks during the IRA bombing campaign some of which have killed women and children. Yet we have taken a balanced approach in our dealings with both the British (and the Unionists) and Sinn Fein in trying to hammer out an agreement. It's only common sense to be even-handed to be truly effective in negotiations. I have mixed feelings with regards to Israel personally. I recognize the special relationship we have with them and I'm sympathetic to their plight. However, whether it's spying on us using Jonathan Pollard: http://www.aci.net/kalliste/pollard_em.htm or illegally sending U.S. missle technology to the Chinese: http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0799/9907049.html they have shown they will often act in their own self interest regardless of the damage to U.S. national security. We pretty much look the other way after these transgressions so I don't think it's outrageous for us to ask for some concessions from them during negotiations. In any event the bottom line is Dean didn't say anything wrong IMO. Lieberman is behind in the polls and was just trying to score political points by suggesting that Dean said something completely intolerable. Our ties to Israel are bulletproof and unshakeable. Anyone who insinuates that Dean plans to change and weaken that relationship is simply being a disningenuous demagouge.
what the hell are you talking about???? how is that anti-semetic? it's a fact that the largest jewish population on the planent lives in the US.
Egypt receives the 2nd largest amount of US aid. Going by your asinine logic, there must be millions of Egyptians in this country lobbying Congress, controlling the media and writing TV sitcoms.
The previous post that you claimed anti-semitism is not anti-semitic, but merely stating fact. Fortune ranked the most powerful lobbies in the US: AARP, NRA, AIPAC, Christian Coalition... (no link, search on google) AIPAC being the 3rd most powerful lobby shows why we support Israel, view one sided news of the Israeli-Palestinian issues and continue to fund Israel's occupation and oppression (undebateable facts) of the Palestinian people. The USS Liberty and Jonathan Pollard are just 2 examples of Israels disregard for the US, and has for years. Claiming that the AIPAC lobby is not influencing how politicians focus this country is naive. The NRA has us with legal machine guns, which have no sporting purpose at all, but the NRA lobby is effective. Same thing. By the way, cruise European, Russian, and Asian news sites instead of foxnews and cnn (heck, sometimes you can go to edition.cnn.com) and you'll see a big difference in coverage. The US gets one-sided coverage. Furthermore, the last study I saw showed Muslims tend to vote 2/3 democratic approximately the same ways as Jews vote, meaning that there is no need for a politician to try to play to the pro-Palestinian side.
Why does Egypt receive so much US aid? Could it be that, like Israel, they are an important ally in the region and (by Arab standards) relatively stable? Think foreign policy & US interests before assuming that one lobbying group can exert overwhelming power on Capitol Hill. Jews as a voting bloc are no where near as powerful as blacks or hispanics. We need allies where ever we can get them. The Palestinians really have little to offer us unless they become a separate, stable country.
Think Lobbying IS foreign policy IS US interests. Jews are a powerful voting block in that they vote more often than blacks or hispanics, plus the Jewish population is concentrated in high electoral vote states. The only thing that we can gain by being a fair broker to 2 incredibly hardheaded a$$holes like Sharon and Arafat is a just peace for an oppressed people. Why did we sanction South Africa for Apartheid while supporting Israel's policies which are exactly the same? US organizations lobbied against South Africa. Saudi Arabia has similar practices that we ignore because of need for oil (yes US interests which are entwined with US oil company profits - and their lobbyists, who are more powerful than the feminist lobby) If you consider Israel an ally, why do they spy on us, disregard what we ask them to do, attack our vessels (yes 36 years ago, but nothing has changed), and yet we veto every pro-palestinian UN resolution? They control us more than we control them. It would take a president with some real cajones to tell Israel you can't have any more F-16s, etc. to occupy the oppressed Palestinians, not because of losing a foothold in the region, but because of losing re-election. Israel provides us precious little today except headaches. We have access to the region through Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Israel is not a "stable foothold" for the US anymore. Yes, Palestinians really have little to offer us unless they become a separate, stable country. They will never become a separate, stable country as long as we provide funding for the Israelis to practice genocide and keep the people living in refugee camps instead of cities with thriving economies. If we were to solve the Palestinian problem, the disenfranchised Muslims worldwide would have to search for another reason to hate the US, but the new reason would not be nearly as effective as "the support of Israel as they kill Palestinian children."
Funny you should bring this up. I have this tendency to think of people who reference the Liberty as proof of Israel's perfidy as dumbasses. (EDIT - Did I just dream that Ben answered the astounding stupidity of this take? I went to look for Liberty documents - God, there's a thankless task, lotta freaking bigots on the net - and I coulda sworn Ben Reilly knocked this one into the cheap seats. Oh, well.) Yeah, it was Israel that forced the Palestinians to live in refugee camps in Jordanian and Egyptian territory. Just like we force Cuban refugees to live in camps. Israel - proud sponsors of the World's Slowest Genocide (over 50 years, and still nowhere near finished!)