You mean when Israeli helicopters blow up something and kill some innocent people in the process is not terrorism?

I'm talking about Jews in Muslim states. They are not waging terror campaigns in places like Morocco and Iran despite being persecuted far more than Muslims are in Israel.

Israel is majority Jewish. It would make sense that power would mostly be in the hands of the Jewish community, just like most of the power in Muslim majority countries are in the hands of Muslims.

What exactly has America gained by having Israel as an ally? Why do we care about Israel? It is not bias against Israel to say we shouldn't support them, it's called looking after yourself.


First, during the Cold War we knew we could count on Israel. We couldn't count on the Arab states, and in fact ,most of them would have sided with the Soviets in a potential WWIII.

Second, we can still count on Israel. They are our staunchest ally, even moreso than Britain. They would assault Peking if we asked them to.

Third, they are the only bastion of democracy aside from Turkey in that region. American policy for decades has been to support democracies. We also do it with Taiwan despite the fact that Taiwan is probably more of a strategic liability than a benefit to us. We also support Turkey.

Finally, if we want peace in the region, it is essential that we support Israel. Every other nation in the world either supports the Arabs or is neutral. the only nation Israel trusts to look out for their interests is us. The Arabs not only have each other, but most of the rest of the world looking out for them(mainly because the rest of the world is even more dependent on their oil than we are.)

__________________
chicken butt

What did they do for us during the Cold War? I'm not saying I know they did nothing, but I assume you have something specific and I'd be interested to know.

Hmm, well when America's military budget is 47 percent of the world budget, I'm not sure if it is military allies that we need... How do you know they would assault Peking (though a war with China seems ridiculous, that's another thread)?

I'm not sure if I see that correlation. We support dictators as long as they are friendly towards us, though we may wag our fingers if the dictator squelches democracy too violently.

So you're saying that if America didn't openly support Israel, then the Arabs would attack and destroy it? Not if Israel has its own subs w/nukes.

I don't know, it still seems like any military advantage from Israel is negligible compared to our overall military might, and mostly our support of them creates enemies, but that doesn't mean I'm close to evidence to the contrary.

What did they do for us during the Cold War? I'm not saying I know they did nothing, but I assume you have something specific and I'd be interested to know.



They didn't do anything because it was never necessary. But if it had come to war with the Soviets and their Arab allies, we'd definitely have the advantage with Israel and Turkey.

Hmm, well when America's military budget is 47 percent of the world budget, I'm not sure if it is military allies that we need... How do you know they would assault Peking (though a war with China seems ridiculous, that's another thread)?

Israel has never failed to back us up morally when we've gone to war, and would help us if we asked. We usually don't because there are political drawbacks to involving Israel militarily. While those drawbacks are a serious problem when fighting in the Middle East, a war with China or Russia would present no particular problems with using Israel's military.

I'm not sure if I see that correlation. We support dictators as long as they are friendly towards us, though we may wag our fingers if the dictator squelches democracy too violently.



Note I didn't say we support democracy and not dictators. while our anger at dictators is often selective, our support for democracy is not. Nations like Israel, Taiwan, Turkey, and now Lithuania will be supported even at the risk of war, even though the strategic advantage of doing so is questionable. Especially in Lithuania's case.

Then again, standing behind a country when no one else will makes you great friends. The Kurds are as loyal as Israel. Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, as well as Poland, are great friends. In the long run, standing up for these peoples improves our standing in the world, although in the short run it makes powerful enemies.

So you're saying that if America didn't openly support Israel, then the Arabs would attack and destroy it? Not if Israel has its own subs w/nukes

No, I'm saying Israel would take a much harder line if they thought they were alone in the world.

I don't know, it still seems like any military advantage from Israel is negligible compared to our overall military might, and mostly our support of them creates enemies, but that doesn't mean I'm close to evidence to the contrary.


That's true of more countries than just Israel, as I pointed out above. Where is our military advantage in supporting Tibet over China?

Israel is the most publicized example, but there are others, and those others have far more powerful enemies than Israel. It is very possible that we may have to come to Taiwan or the Baltic Republics' defense one day. We'll probably never have to put American troops in danger to protect Israel.

__________________
chicken butt

1. Nuclear complex started in Iraq destroyed by an Israeli plane
2.Nuclear complex started in Syria destroyed by Israeli plane
Both of these countries have terrorist.
3 The information received from Israel on terrorist forces in the mideast.
need I go on?

I'm not accusing anything, its all fact lol. Six million dead, much more pushed into intentional (mostly passive) exile. Millennium of persecution. Europeans finally found their answer around the turn of last century, Zionism. Their bigotry was unmaintainable even with enlightened leaders, so Socialist/nationalists Jews found an answer most European governments seemed fine to go along with even if objections were raised.

Zionism is an international political movement that supports a homeland for the Jewish People in the Land of Israel.[59] Although its origins are earlier, the movement was formally established by the Austrian journalist Theodor Herzl in the late nineteenth century. The international movement was eventually successful in establishing the State of Israel in 1948, as the world's first and only modern Jewish State. It continues primarily as support for the state and government of Israel and its continuing status as a homeland for the Jewish people.[60] Described as a "diaspora nationalism,"[61] its proponents regard it as a national liberation movement whose aim is the self-determination of the Jewish people.[62]

While Zionism is based in part upon religious tradition linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, where the concept of Jewish nationhood is thought to have first evolved somewhere between 1200 BCE and the late Second Temple era (i.e. up to 70 AD),[63][64] the modern movement was mainly secular, beginning largely as a response by European Jewry to rampant antisemitism across Europe.[65]

"In addition to responding politically, during the late 19th century, Jews began to flee the persecutions of Eastern Europe in large numbers, mostly by heading to the United States, but also to Canada and Western Europe. By 1924, almost two million Jews had emigrated to the US alone, creating a large community in a nation relatively free of the persecutions of rising European antisemitism (see History of the Jews in the United States)."



Jew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How Europe has persecuted to the point of voluntary exile and then proceeded to sell them out is atrocious. At least most European governments still seem to defy their populations.


Yea I took back the anti Jew stuff before you posted this anyways, but yes most every group as big as Zionism is going to have a counter to it.

the arabs dont have eachother, their so called solidarity does not go beyond words and the arab league does not have any unity.

My goodness and my father told me he was driving his ambulance with the British Army against Germany more than 2 years before the USA entered this war.

However I think comments on this post have proved that the USA support for Israel and whatever it does is far more concerned about having a strong strategic ally than anything to do with Jews.
I suspect after your previous efforts to use emotional blackmail to keep people quiet didn't work, this was just your way of trying to suggest all Europeans have something against Jewish people which is certainly not the case and feels somewhat abusive.

How would you for instance like it if I started suggesting you had a thing against Black people because of your history of slaves. It just isn't an argument. It's just being rude and trying to stop people talking.

Yes, a lot of Europe sees the situation of Israel very differently to how you in the US see it and that includes a lot of European Jews.

But we do not see Israel as our Ally. So we judge it differently. We can be more objective.

Europe has an moral obligation to see this through imo, even if it hates the taste.

I have not a clue what you mean by this.

So lets see how your country did

'United States--not particularly receptive after the 1920's
result of increasingly intolerant and bigoted atmosphere (anti-Communist, isolationist)
xenophobia and the last immigration from southern and eastern Europe as opposed to the older immigration of north Europeans
severe curbs were fixed and unequal quotas were set, limiting the number of
immigrants from southern and eastern Europe
beginning in 1917, Congress reacted to the anti-immigration
sentiment of the American people by passing the first phase of what evolved into the National Origins Quota Act of 1924 (Johnson-Reed Act)
this act was a revision of an earlier (Johnson Act, 1921) version of the quota principle
the number of immigrants permitted to enter the U.S. from any country in a given year was set at 3% of the number of foreign-born persons from that country counted in the 1920 census
the quotas were strictly enforces and non-transferrable
this continued throughout the 1930's
this was also a high point of anti-Semitism in the US
during the entire Holocaust period there were over one million places on the quota list that went unfilled (quotas couldn't be switched from one country to another)
State Department personnel were largely at fault
its social makeup consisted of eastern anti-Semitic elite
all liberalization attempts failed due to State Department opposition (in addition to DAR, VFW [patriotic groups], conservative congressmen, etc.)
Roosevelt was sympathetic (so was Eleanor), but he was unwilling to risk the support of conservative supporters (especially southerners)'
http://www.fortunecity.com/boozers/t...8/REFUGEES.htm

My relations were busy fighting Nazi Germany. To try to pretend we have anything to be ashamed of is rediculous.

I also know that many people in Holland and other European countries risked their lives protecting Jews.

And why if the situation in Israel is so good would British Jews feel the need to publish this Letters: We're not celebrating Israel's anniversary | World news | The Guardian

Because the policy had British and general European endorsement. . .

Anti-Semites believed that establishment of a Jewish homeland would be a convenient way to rid Europe of Jews. Imperialists hoped that a Jewish Palestine would be an excuse for a British protectorate there, and might serve as a solution for the "Eastern Question."

British Support for Jewish Restoration