Post by: Guest on November 29, 2005, 06:03:20 PM
We give them three billion a year. They're second only to the former Soviet Union in selling weapons to China.
We give them advanced technology. They sell it to China. They've been doing this at full speed ahead since 1992, with Patriot Missile Systems, building prototype aircraft with US cash and technology and sharing it with China, etc. They don't give a crap how much they're endangering Taiwan and US soldiers if we defend Taiwan from Israeli-armament fueled Chinese aggression.
Israel sold spare parts and weapons willynilly to Iran, cavalierly attempted to ignite an arms race in south american countries, and then starts complaining whenever the US is about to sell something to an Arab nation. Cough.
They've also spied on us heavily, stolen as many secrets as possible, and cost many lives by trading spy intelligence on our agents to Commies, before Russia came down.
Last I checked, China wasn't the reason Israel exists as a country. I believe we were that deciding factor. I can trust Israel to look out for the wellbeing of, well, Israel, which is why threatening them with a Tac-Nuke right on their farmlands would be an excellent way to keep them in line.
I like Israel, I want them to stick around for a long time, but they belong in a much more submissive position. Comments?
And, yeah, most gun board people are going to throw a fit at this type of post, because pictures of chicks walking around with guns give them chubbies.
http://www.policyalmanac.org/world/archive/crs_israeli-us_relations.shtml
Post by: brimic on November 29, 2005, 09:25:58 PM
We give the United States Government roughly 2 trillion $$s per year out of our pockets and the government has and continues to do 1000x as much of everything that you pointed out that Israel has done.
I'm not trying to whitewash Israel- they are far from perfect, but we have much bigger fish to fry in the world, or at least complain about.
Post by: Sindawe on November 29, 2005, 09:36:33 PM
Quote
They're second only to the former Soviet Union in selling weapons to China.
So why the Hezmana is Israel making more $$$ than us at the arms trade?Quote
We give them three billion a year
Time for Israel to stand on its own financially. Along with the rest of the frelling planet. Daddy Warbuck we ARE NOT.Personally, for all their faults (which like ours, are many) I LIKE having Israel around. Keeps the world...interesting.
Post by: The Rabbi on November 30, 2005, 05:16:01 AM
That said, I'd like nothing better than to see Israel cut off from US aid so they can make decisions like other normal countries instead of being dependent on Uncle Sam, or Dodi Shmuel, as he is known.
Post by: richyoung on November 30, 2005, 08:27:19 AM
Post by: Phantom Warrior on November 30, 2005, 10:52:13 AM
So I can understand a policy of "Look out for number one." Again, not excusing it, but they've gotten stabbed in the back a lot.
Post by: RevDisk on November 30, 2005, 05:48:38 PM
A more recent scandal was some allegedly Mossad connected companies (Comverse and JSI) in the telecom industry were involved in wiretapping the feds. Plus Franklin-AIPAC. Etc, etc.
Phantom Warrior, sorry to seem cold blooded, but I lack sympathy for a nation that engages in hostile military and intelligence operations against my own nation. There is no excuse for a "friendly" nation to roast US servicepersons alive, nor wiretapping US federal agencies, nor attempting (actually, succeeding) to infiltrate the Pentagon.
Post by: Bemidjiblade on December 01, 2005, 04:09:44 AM
We haven't always been there for Israel, and back in 48 we just sat back and left them to die. They'd be morons not to keep tabs on us because we've proven they can't depend on us. Now, Israel is perhaps the ONLY country you'll ever hear me say has a vested interest in keeping watch on us. Let's compare and contrast here. Kuwait got invaded and we went to war. For 40+ years the murderous jerks surrounding Israel have been trying to wipe them off of the face of the planet, and we have never committed any troops. We've proven more willing to help terrorists in Bosnia than our strongest ally in the middle east. If we're supposed to be such good friends that they should never spy on us, then we've really fallen short of the mark.
Post by: richyoung on December 01, 2005, 06:32:22 AM
Quote from: Bemidjiblade
RevDisk,
We haven't always been there for Israel, and back in 48 we just sat back and left them to die. They'd be morons not to keep tabs on us because we've proven they can't depend on us. Now, Israel is perhaps the ONLY country you'll ever hear me say has a vested interest in keeping watch on us. Let's compare and contrast here. Kuwait got invaded and we went to war. For 40+ years the murderous jerks surrounding Israel have been trying to wipe them off of the face of the planet, and we have never committed any troops. We've proven more willing to help terrorists in Bosnia than our strongest ally in the middle east. If we're supposed to be such good friends that they should never spy on us, then we've really fallen short of the mark.
What you say is true...but not the whole picture. The REASON the Liberty was there was to prove that Russian aircrews were manning so-called 'Egyptian" bombers - to HELP Isreal - for which they got blowed up. In the Yom Kippur war, it was only American resupply via C-5 cargo aircraft that kept Isreal in the game, and American SR-71 photos that convinced the Russians to puty pressure on Sadat to set terms.
We haven't always been there for Israel, and back in 48 we just sat back and left them to die. They'd be morons not to keep tabs on us because we've proven they can't depend on us. Now, Israel is perhaps the ONLY country you'll ever hear me say has a vested interest in keeping watch on us. Let's compare and contrast here. Kuwait got invaded and we went to war. For 40+ years the murderous jerks surrounding Israel have been trying to wipe them off of the face of the planet, and we have never committed any troops. We've proven more willing to help terrorists in Bosnia than our strongest ally in the middle east. If we're supposed to be such good friends that they should never spy on us, then we've really fallen short of the mark.
Post by: Bemidjiblade on December 01, 2005, 11:52:45 AM
You're making great points. I wasn't trying to diminish the fact that we HAVE been allies. But we have also fallen short. So I would fully expect the sort of guarded cooperation that would mean they have contingency plans. We're allies, and I'm glad and approve, but I think they'd be fools to rely upon the political will of America, so I don't blame them for keeping tabs and being sure not to be totally dependent on our power base.
Post by: richyoung on December 02, 2005, 05:19:45 AM
Post by: Phantom Warrior on December 02, 2005, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: richyoung
Don't know if I'd go that far: after all, where would we get Desert eagles from? (Not to mention that IMI used to make some pretty good "hard slides" for 1911s....)
Magnum Research, of Minnesota, actually makes the Desert Eagle. IMI did help Magnum Research with some design issues when the Desert Eagle was first introduced (hence this persistent myth), but it's actually a Magnum Research gun.A detailed history is available on the Modern Firearms webpage.
Post by: Bemidjiblade on December 03, 2005, 03:35:11 AM
I guess I agree with both sides. We can and should expect Israeli cooperation, but I think it's unreasonable to expect blind trust.
If someone ditched you once in a life and death situation, would you honestly ever blindly trust them again? I think that even if you chose to forgive and remain friends/coworkers whatever, you would always be keeping an eye out just in case. It's simply CYOA.
Post by: RevDisk on December 11, 2005, 09:14:29 AM
Quote from: Bemidjiblade
RevDisk,
We haven't always been there for Israel, and back in 48 we just sat back and left them to die. They'd be morons not to keep tabs on us because we've proven they can't depend on us. Now, Israel is perhaps the ONLY country you'll ever hear me say has a vested interest in keeping watch on us. Let's compare and contrast here. Kuwait got invaded and we went to war. For 40+ years the murderous jerks surrounding Israel have been trying to wipe them off of the face of the planet, and we have never committed any troops. We've proven more willing to help terrorists in Bosnia than our strongest ally in the middle east. If we're supposed to be such good friends that they should never spy on us, then we've really fallen short of the mark.
Been a bit busy, work's hell at the moment. But better paying than the Army. Sorry for the delay.We haven't always been there for Israel, and back in 48 we just sat back and left them to die. They'd be morons not to keep tabs on us because we've proven they can't depend on us. Now, Israel is perhaps the ONLY country you'll ever hear me say has a vested interest in keeping watch on us. Let's compare and contrast here. Kuwait got invaded and we went to war. For 40+ years the murderous jerks surrounding Israel have been trying to wipe them off of the face of the planet, and we have never committed any troops. We've proven more willing to help terrorists in Bosnia than our strongest ally in the middle east. If we're supposed to be such good friends that they should never spy on us, then we've really fallen short of the mark.
Ahem. I was in the Balkans. And helped train some of said "terrorists". So here's the straight deal on them. The locals did some bad stuff. The foreigners (mujihadeen, from mostly Arab countries) did the REALLY bad *expletive deleted*it. Local Muslims were no worse than the local Christians. Considering they didn't start the war, the Serbs did... Tit for tat ain't a 'moral' justification, but it's a realistic explaination.
In a roundabout manner, local Muslims narc'd on the mujihadeen and/or booted them out of their AO's. Simple reason, mujis were more trouble than they were worth and the US was willing to make it worth the locals' while to play ball. While not as ego pleasing as dropping multi-million dollar smart bombs on the enemy, it worked. Fighting a war on ego is a sure fire way to expensively lose. Fighting a war while being realistic and flexible gives much better odds of winning.
I'm not saying the Muslims in the Balkans were innocent. No one was. No side was the "good guys". All sides, Christian and Muslim, did very bad things at one point or another. The Balkans were a success, per se. Realistically, I know it'll start up again. Someday. Maybe tomorrow, maybe in next decade. That's life. But we kept the mujihadeen from securing the region, at a very reasonable cost efficiency in both personnel and money. Good enough for my books.
Israel is not our friend. They are a hostile government. Not saying we should bomb them into the stone age, although we have many reasons to sanction them instead of giving them aide. I recognize that Israel has their back up against a wall. But we've done much for Israel, and I ain't seeing the payoff. It's not a secular democracy, it doesn't have natural resources we want/need, and they've never significantly done anything to contribute to OUR military or govt. You'd think under those circumstances, they'd play nice. Instead, they play dirty against the hand that feeds. There is a big difference between intelligence and espionage. Intelligence is gathering information. Certainly justifiable and understandable. Espionage is intentionally causing harm. Considering how much we've done for Israel.... No justification. None.
I'm not sure why we are under the impression we have some kind of moral requirement to help a country that has done us so much harm while contributing very little.
Post by: Bemidjiblade on December 11, 2005, 11:15:36 PM
Israel works with the US for the peace process much more than I would have expected, including holding summits here throughout the past two decades, many times in instances that I was shocked because it seemed to be contrary to the interest of the Israeli people.
"It's not a secular democracy." So only secular democracy is acceptible? You expect a nation formed by a persecuted religious ethnicity to be secular?
It's sure not a totalitarian dictatorship, a militant communist country, a hotbed for terrorist training, or any of a dozen other Bad Things I could point to in other countries. Is Israel more socialistic than the UK or other former English "democracies"? Not appreciably so.
These aren't the sort of things that are the case for Iran, pre-war Iraq or Afghanistan, Communist China, etc etc.
As far as intentionally causing harm, I'm not sure I agree with you.
They didn't steal weapons technology from us, we gave it to them.
Is it a "very little" thing that they have been the most consistent military ally in the region for the past 50+ years?
They play dirty against the hand that feeds? What are they, our dogs? That sounds pretty imperialistic. It also doesn't seem to be the whole story. Remember Desert Storm? Israel stayed out of the fighting even though Iraq was firing MISSILES at them because WE asked them to so that we could have OUR military coalition. America would never have made the same sacrifice of national security for another nation.
They produce arms and weaponry, and give it to China. Ok. They have a decent weapons industry. It's not like we don't trade with China eh? And they haven't given them nukes or MIRV technology like Clinton did. I'm not HAPPY about it, but I don't see it as worse that what a certain political party in our own shores has done.
Post by: The Rabbi on December 12, 2005, 04:10:30 AM
Quote from: RevDisk
RevDisk,
Israel is not our friend. They are a hostile government. Not saying we should bomb them into the stone age, although we have many reasons to sanction them instead of giving them aide. I recognize that Israel has their back up against a wall. But we've done much for Israel, and I ain't seeing the payoff. It's not a secular democracy, it doesn't have natural resources we want/need, and they've never significantly done anything to contribute to OUR military or govt. You'd think under those circumstances, they'd play nice. Instead, they play dirty against the hand that feeds. There is a big difference between intelligence and espionage. Intelligence is gathering information. Certainly justifiable and understandable. Espionage is intentionally causing harm. Considering how much we've done for Israel.... No justification. None.
I'm not sure why we are under the impression we have some kind of moral requirement to help a country that has done us so much harm while contributing very little.
You aint seeing the payoff so it isnt there. Yeah, right.Israel is not our friend. They are a hostile government. Not saying we should bomb them into the stone age, although we have many reasons to sanction them instead of giving them aide. I recognize that Israel has their back up against a wall. But we've done much for Israel, and I ain't seeing the payoff. It's not a secular democracy, it doesn't have natural resources we want/need, and they've never significantly done anything to contribute to OUR military or govt. You'd think under those circumstances, they'd play nice. Instead, they play dirty against the hand that feeds. There is a big difference between intelligence and espionage. Intelligence is gathering information. Certainly justifiable and understandable. Espionage is intentionally causing harm. Considering how much we've done for Israel.... No justification. None.
I'm not sure why we are under the impression we have some kind of moral requirement to help a country that has done us so much harm while contributing very little.
I wont mention the bombing of Iraqi nuclear reactor back in, oh '86 or so. I wont mention that Israel has often used US made weapons and then provided field testing under live conditions. I wont mention the myriad intel items that Israel has provided, being as how they have the only effective intelligence in the region. But you aint seeing the payoff so I guess none of those things exist.
If Israel is the biggest foreign aid recipient Egypt is the second biggest. Want to compare those two countries? Which one has free elections? Which one grants rights to its minorities? Which one has close trade relations with the US? But Israel has done so much harm while providing so little, as you cogently point out.
I am so certainly no fan of Israel and its avowedly secular gov't. But when I see garbage like this, ill-informed and seemingly agenda-driven, I have to wonder and I have to at least point out the historical facts.
Post by: richyoung on December 12, 2005, 05:55:30 AM
JohnPollard delivered over 1000 classified documents to Israel for which he was well paid. Included in those documents were the names of over 150 US agents in the Mideast, who were eventually turned into agents for Israel.
But by far the most egregious damage done by Pollard was to steal classified documents relating to the US Nuclear Deterrent relative to the USSR and send them to Israel. According to sources in the US State Department, Israel then turned around and traded those stolen nuclear secrets to the USSR in exchange for increased emigration quotas from the USSR to Israel. Other information that found its way from the US to Israel to the USSR resulted in the loss of American agents operating inside the USSR. Casper Weinberger, in his affidavit opposing a reduced sentence for Pollard, described the damage done to the United States thus, "[It is] difficult to conceive of a greater harm to national security than that caused by... Pollard's treasonous behavior."
1947. Information collected by the ADL in its spy operations on US citizens is used by the House Select Committee on Unamerican Activities. Subcommittee Chair Clare Hoffman dismisses the ADLs reports on suspected communists as hearsay."
1950 John Davitt, former chief of the Justice Department's internal security section notes that the Israeli intelligence service is the second most active in the United States after the Soviets.
1954 A hidden microphone planted by the Israelis is discovered in the Office of the US Ambassador in Tel Aviv.
1956 Telephone taps are found connected to two telephones in the residence of the US military attaché in Tel Aviv.
1954 "The Lavon Affair". Israeli agents recruit Egyptian citizens of Jewish descent to bomb Western targets in Egypt, and plant evidence to frame Arabs, in an apparent attempt to upset US-Egyptian relations. Israeli defense minister Pinchas Lavon is eventually removed from office, though many think real responsibility lay with David Ben-Gurion.
1965 Israel apparently illegally obtains enriched uranium from NUMEC Corporation. (Washington Post, 6/5/86, Charles R. Babcock, "US an Intelligence Target of the Israelis, Officials Say.")
1967 Israel attacks the USS Liberty, an intelligence gathering vessel flying a US flag, killing 34 crew members. See "Assault on the Liberty," by James M. Ennes, Jr. (Random House). In 2004, Captain Ward Boston, Senior Legal Counsel for the Navys Court of Inquiry into the attack swears under oath that President Lyndon Johnson ordered the investigation to conclude accident, even though the evidence indicates the attack was deliberate. Given the use by Israel of unmarked boats and planes, and the machine-gunning of USS Libertys lifeboats, the most likely explanation is that USS Liberty was to be sunk with all hands, with evidence left to frame Egypt for the sinking. This would have dragged the US into the war on Israels side.
1970 While working for Senator Henry Scoop Jackson, Richard Perle is caught by the FBI giving classified information to Israel. Nothing is done.
1978, Stephen Bryen, then a Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer, is overheard in a DC hotel offering confidential documents to top Israeli military officials. Bryen obtains a lawyer, Nathan Lewin, and the case heads for the grand jury, but is mysteriously dropped. Bryen later goes to work for Richard Perle.
1979 Shin Beth [the Israeli internal security agency] tries to penetrate the US Consulate General in Jerusalem through a Honey Trap , using a clerical employee who was having an affair with a Jerusalem girl.
1985 The New York Times reports the FBI is aware of at least a dozen incidents in which American officials transferred classified information to the Israelis, quoting [former Assistant Director of the F.B.I.] Mr. [Raymond] Wannal. The Justice Department does not prosecute.
1985 Richard Smyth, the owner of MILCO, is indicted on charges of smuggling nuclear timing devices to Israel (Washington Post, 10/31/86).
1987 April 24 Wall Street Journal headline: "Role of Israel in Iran-Contra Scandal Won't be Explored in Detail by Panels"
1992 The Wall Street Journal reports that Israeli agents apparently tried to steal Recon Optical Inc's top-secret airborne spy-camera system.
1992 Stephen Bryen, caught offering confidential documents to Israel in 1978, is serving on board of the pro-Israeli Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs while continuing as a paid consultant -- with security clearance -- on exports of sensitive US technology.
1992 "The Samson Option," by Seymour M. Hersh reports, Illicitly obtained intelligence was flying so voluminously from LAKAM into Israeli intelligence that a special code name, JUMBO, was added to the security markings already on the documents. There were strict orders, Ari Ben-Menashe recalled: "Anything marked JUMBO was not supposed to be discussed with your American counterparts."
1993. The ADL is caught operating a massive spying operation on critics of Israel, Arab-Americans, the San Francisco Labor Council, ILWU Local 10, Oakland Educational Association, NAACP, Irish Northern Aid, International Indian Treaty Council, the Asian Law Caucus and the San Francisco police. Data collected was sent to Israel and in some cases to South Africa. Pressure from Jewish organizations forces the city to drop the criminal case, but the ADL settles a civil lawsuit for an undisclosed sum of cash.
1995 The Defense Investigative Service circulates a memo warning US military contractors that "Israel aggressively collects [US] military and industrial technology." The report stated that Israel obtains information using "ethnic targeting, financial aggrandizement, and identification and exploitation of individual frailties" of US citizens.
1996 A General Accounting Office report "Defense Industrial Security: Weaknesses in US Security Arrangements With Foreign-Owned Defense Contractors" found that according to intelligence sources "Country A" (identified by intelligence sources as Israel, Washington Times, 2/22/96) "conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the United States of any US ally." The Jerusalem Post (8/30/96) quoted the report, "Classified military information and sensitive military technologies are high-priority targets for the intelligence agencies of this country." The report described "An espionage operation run by the intelligence organization responsible for collecting scientific and technologic information for [Israel] paid a US government employee to obtain US classified military intelligence documents." The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (Shawn L. Twing, April 1996) noted that this was "a reference to the 1985 arrest of Jonathan Pollard, a civilian US naval intelligence analyst who provided Israel's LAKAM [Office of Special Tasks] espionage agency an estimated 800,000 pages of classified US intelligence information."
The GAO report also noted that "Several citizens of [Israel] were caught in the United States stealing sensitive technology used in manufacturing artillery gun tubes."
1996 An Office of Naval Intelligence document, "Worldwide Challenges to Naval Strike Warfare" reported that "US technology has been acquired [by China] through Israel in the form of the Lavi fighter and possibly SAM [surface-to-air] missile technology." Jane's Defense Weekly (2/28/96) noted that "until now, the intelligence community has not openly confirmed the transfer of US technology [via Israel] to China." The report noted that this "represents a dramatic step forward for Chinese military aviation." (Flight International, 3/13/96)
1997 An Army mechanical engineer, David A. Tenenbaum, "inadvertently" gives classified military information on missile systems and armored vehicles to Israeli officials (New York Times, 2/20/97).
1997 The Washington Post reports US intelligence has intercepted a conversation in which two Israeli officials had discussed the possibility of getting a confidential letter that then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher had written to Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat. One of the Israelis, identified only as Dov , had commented that they may get the letter from "Mega , the code name for Israels top agent inside the United States.
1997 US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, complains privately to the Israeli government about heavy-handed surveillance by Israeli intelligence agents.
1997 Israeli agents place a tap on Monica Lewinskys phone at the Watergate and record phone sex sessions between her and President Bill Clinton. The Ken Starr report confirms that Clinton warned Lewinsky their conversations were being taped and ended the affair. At the same time, the FBIs hunt for Mega is called off.
2001 It is discovered that US drug agents communications have been penetrated. Suspicion falls on two companies, AMDOCS and Comverse Infosys, both owned by Israelis. AMDOCS generates billing data for most US phone companies and is able to provide detailed logs of who is talking to whom. Comverse Infosys builds the tapping equipment used by law enforcement to eavesdrop on all American telephone calls, but suspicion forms that Comverse, which gets half of its research and development budget from the Israeli government, has built a back door into the system that is being exploited by Israeli intelligence and that the information gleaned on US drug interdiction efforts is finding its way to drug smugglers. The investigation by the FBI leads to the exposure of the largest foreign spy ring ever uncovered inside the United States, operated by Israel. Half of the suspected spies have been arrested when 9-11 happens. On 9-11, 5 Israelis are arrested for dancing and cheering while the World Trade Towers collapse. Supposedly employed by Urban Moving Systems, the Israelis are caught with multiple passports and a lot of cash. Two of them are later revealed to be Mossad. As witness reports track the activity of the Israelis, it emerges that they were seen at Liberty Park at the time of the first impact, suggesting a foreknowledge of what was to come. The Israelis are interrogated, and then eventually sent back to Israel. The owner of the moving company used as a cover by the Mossad agents abandons his business and flees to Israel. The United States Government then classifies all of the evidence related to the Israeli agents and their connections to 9-11. All of this is reported to the public via a four part story on Fox News by Carl Cameron. Pressure from Jewish groups, primarily AIPAC, forces Fox News to remove the story from their website. Two hours prior to the 9-11 attacks, Odigo, an Israeli company with offices just a few blocks from the World Trade Towers, receives an advance warning via the internet. The manager of the New York Office provides the FBI with the IP address of the sender of the message, but the FBI does not follow up.
2001 The FBI is investigating 5 Israeli moving companies as possible fronts for Israeli intelligence.
2001 JDLs Irv Rubin arrested for planning to bomb a US Congressman. He dies before he can be brought to trial.
2002 The DEA issues a report that Israeli spies, posing as art students, have been trying to penetrate US Government offices.
2002 police near the Whidbey Island Naval Air Station in southern Washington State stop a suspicious truck and detain two Israelis, one of whom is illegally in the United States. The two men were driving at high speed in a Ryder rental truck, which they claimed had been used to "deliver furniture." The next day, police discovered traces of TNT and RDX military-grade plastic explosives inside the passenger cabin and on the steering wheel of the vehicle. The FBI then announces that the tests that showed explosives were false positived by cigarette smoke, a claim test experts say is ridiculous. Based on an alibi provided by a woman, the case is closed and the Israelis are handed over to INS to be sent back to Israel. One week later, the woman who provided the alibi vanishes.
2003 The Police Chief of Cloudcroft stops a truck speeding through a school zone. The drivers turn out to be Israelis with expired passports. Claiming to be movers, the truck contains junk furniture and several boxes. The Israelis are handed over to immigration. The contents of the boxers are not revealed to the public.
2003 Israel deploys assassination squads into other countries, including the United States. The US Government does not protest.
2004 Police near the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in Tennessee stop a truck after a three mile chase, during which the driver throws a bottle containing a strange liquid from the cab. The drivers turn out to be Israelis using fake Ids. The FBI refuses to investigate and the Israelis are released.
2004 Two Israelis try to enter Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base, home to eight Trident submarines. The truck tests positive for explosives.
EDITED TO ADD: There is also some circomstantial evidence to suggest that the Chandra Levi affair was an intelligence operation gone bad. SHe may have been a "honey trap" for Gary Condit, who was a senior member of the House intelligence commitee.
Post by: Guest on December 12, 2005, 04:03:25 PM
>>1954 "The Lavon Affair". Israeli agents recruit Egyptian citizens of Jewish descent to bomb Western targets in Egypt, and plant evidence to frame Arabs, in an apparent attempt to upset US-Egyptian relations. Israeli defense minister Pinchas Lavon is eventually removed from office, though many think real responsibility lay with David Ben-Gurion.<<
This I know a bit about. My father was there in '56 - Suez Canal, one of the first on the beach with the British Army corps of engineers.
Egyptian dictator Nasser was a full-blown Nazi. My father's unit captures propaganda films praising Hitler *and* the Holocaust. Not denying it mind you - praising it. This had a serious effect on the moral of a bunch of English/Scots/Welsh/etc. kids who had themselves survived WW2. My father at age 10 was watching Spitfires duke it out overhead when his parents weren't pulling him back into bomb shelters.
Now. If Nasser had those kinds of tendencies, and he absolutely did, how in God's name do you think Jews would react? Hmmm? Try "balls to the wall frenzy, every dirty trick in the book and then some" just for starters.
I have absolutely no doubt the bit quoted above as Israel's doing is correct. It is absolutely in line with how I'd expect Israel to react to that sort of threat, the threat my father was an eyewitness to in the same period.
Betcha we still don't know half the stuff Israel did to that openly pro-Nazi regime...and under the circumstances ALL of it would be fully warranted right up to the slow torture to the death of the whole Nasser ruling elite regime.
---------------
That's just one piece of the above that I *know* is wildly slanted against Israel. Makes me strongly distrust the whole list - not necessarily the raw facts themselves, but the surrounding data, the circumstances that drove each event.
Were they in the right every time? Hell no, that would be impossible. But they damnsure weren't wrong as often as that list makes out.
Post by: Justin on December 12, 2005, 08:28:58 PM
Quote
I'm not sure why we are under the impression we have some kind of moral requirement to help a country that has done us so much harm while contributing very little.
For some folks the payoff is eschatological in nature...
Post by: MicroBalrog on December 13, 2005, 02:20:36 AM
This said and done: The US 'aid to Israel' is not actually aid. What most Israelis (and Americans) fail to understand that it is conditional on two points:
A)That Israel (and Egypt, who is ALSO an FMS beneficiary).
and
B)That Israel only spends the FMS money on American-made technology.
This has forced Israel to not only return every dime of FMS money to America (by purchasing F-16's, Colt rifles, and Salt Lake ammo), but to also invest lots of EXTRA money in America.
Why? Because if Israel wants to make a new technology and pay for it with FMS money, it needs to invest in a US business to make it in the states. The reason IMI (a government company, by the way) invested in Magnum Research and now Mossberg is so that Israel would be in possession of US-based small arms factories. In a similar vein, Israel relocated shoe and uniform factories to America.
And yes. Israel likely spies on the US. And the US spies on Israel.
And every other sane European nation has spies in the US. And the US has spies in France and Germany and Britain.
If you think otherwise, then you would be very naive.
Post by: MicroBalrog on December 13, 2005, 02:25:42 AM
Quote
I am so certainly no fan of Israel and its avowedly secular gov't. .
Secular government? Are you sure I am living in the same Israel?
Post by: richyoung on December 13, 2005, 04:16:47 AM
Quote from: JimMarch
Quoting:
>>1954 "The Lavon Affair". Israeli agents recruit Egyptian citizens of Jewish descent to bomb Western targets in Egypt, and plant evidence to frame Arabs, in an apparent attempt to upset US-Egyptian relations. Israeli defense minister Pinchas Lavon is eventually removed from office, though many think real responsibility lay with David Ben-Gurion.<<
This I know a bit about. My father was there in '56 - Suez Canal, one of the first on the beach with the British Army corps of engineers.
Egyptian dictator Nasser was a full-blown Nazi. My father's unit captures propaganda films praising Hitler *and* the Holocaust. Not denying it mind you - praising it. This had a serious effect on the moral of a bunch of English/Scots/Welsh/etc. kids who had themselves survived WW2. My father at age 10 was watching Spitfires duke it out overhead when his parents weren't pulling him back into bomb shelters.
Now. If Nasser had those kinds of tendencies, and he absolutely did, how in God's name do you think Jews would react? Hmmm? Try "balls to the wall frenzy, every dirty trick in the book and then some" just for starters.
I have absolutely no doubt the bit quoted above as Israel's doing is correct. It is absolutely in line with how I'd expect Israel to react to that sort of threat, the threat my father was an eyewitness to in the same period.
Betcha we still don't know half the stuff Israel did to that openly pro-Nazi regime...and under the circumstances ALL of it would be fully warranted right up to the slow torture to the death of the whole Nasser ruling elite regime.
---------------
That's just one piece of the above that I *know* is wildly slanted against Israel. Makes me strongly distrust the whole list - not necessarily the raw facts themselves, but the surrounding data, the circumstances that drove each event.
Were they in the right every time? Hell no, that would be impossible. But they damnsure weren't wrong as often as that list makes out.
Read again - they weren't bombing EGYPTIAN targets - they were bombing WESTERN targets - folks like your dad, at the time. Still OK with you?
>>1954 "The Lavon Affair". Israeli agents recruit Egyptian citizens of Jewish descent to bomb Western targets in Egypt, and plant evidence to frame Arabs, in an apparent attempt to upset US-Egyptian relations. Israeli defense minister Pinchas Lavon is eventually removed from office, though many think real responsibility lay with David Ben-Gurion.<<
This I know a bit about. My father was there in '56 - Suez Canal, one of the first on the beach with the British Army corps of engineers.
Egyptian dictator Nasser was a full-blown Nazi. My father's unit captures propaganda films praising Hitler *and* the Holocaust. Not denying it mind you - praising it. This had a serious effect on the moral of a bunch of English/Scots/Welsh/etc. kids who had themselves survived WW2. My father at age 10 was watching Spitfires duke it out overhead when his parents weren't pulling him back into bomb shelters.
Now. If Nasser had those kinds of tendencies, and he absolutely did, how in God's name do you think Jews would react? Hmmm? Try "balls to the wall frenzy, every dirty trick in the book and then some" just for starters.
I have absolutely no doubt the bit quoted above as Israel's doing is correct. It is absolutely in line with how I'd expect Israel to react to that sort of threat, the threat my father was an eyewitness to in the same period.
Betcha we still don't know half the stuff Israel did to that openly pro-Nazi regime...and under the circumstances ALL of it would be fully warranted right up to the slow torture to the death of the whole Nasser ruling elite regime.
---------------
That's just one piece of the above that I *know* is wildly slanted against Israel. Makes me strongly distrust the whole list - not necessarily the raw facts themselves, but the surrounding data, the circumstances that drove each event.
Were they in the right every time? Hell no, that would be impossible. But they damnsure weren't wrong as often as that list makes out.
Post by: The Rabbi on December 13, 2005, 05:50:46 AM
Quote
Secular government? Are you sure I am living in the same Israel?
I dont know where you live. Can you buy pork in your city? Can you ride the busses on Shabbos? Can you eat in non-kosher restaurants?
Post by: Guest on December 13, 2005, 06:33:48 AM
Well my dad didn't show up until two years later
but yeah, I do understand. Property damage only though as I recall, unless you have data to the contrary?Again, I'm not saying they didn't pull dirty tricks. But let's stop and think for a sec: was it proper for western governments to have anything to do with a guy like Nasser who was openly espousing continuing the Holocaust?! Under those circumstances, is blowing up an empty building or three such a serious sin?
Post by: richyoung on December 13, 2005, 07:53:38 AM
Quote from: JimMarch
Rich Young:
Well my dad didn't show up until two years later but yeah, I do understand. Property damage only though as I recall, unless you have data to the contrary?
Again, I'm not saying they didn't pull dirty tricks. But let's stop and think for a sec: was it proper for western governments to have anything to do with a guy like Nasser who was openly espousing continuing the Holocaust?! Under those circumstances, is blowing up an empty building or three such a serious sin?
When its done to trick an ally into war, in my opinion, yes - it's quite a serious sin. If we didn't associate, or do business with folks who think the 'Final SOlution" is just a jim-dandy idea, gasoline would be 5 bucks a gallon - or more. Nasser wasn't any worse than the Shah, the Saudis. the Kuwaitis, the Iraqis, etc. Not to mention all the other genocides occuring in Russia, Red China, North Korea, Cambosia, Vietnam, Ruwanda, Mogadishu, Mozambique. the Congo, etc, etc, etc,,,,
Well my dad didn't show up until two years later
but yeah, I do understand. Property damage only though as I recall, unless you have data to the contrary?Again, I'm not saying they didn't pull dirty tricks. But let's stop and think for a sec: was it proper for western governments to have anything to do with a guy like Nasser who was openly espousing continuing the Holocaust?! Under those circumstances, is blowing up an empty building or three such a serious sin?
Post by: Guest on December 13, 2005, 11:07:08 AM
This was during the period when Nasser was preaching "Arab unity". He actually merged the nation of Egypt with that of Syria for a while there. That meant Israel had militarily strong opposition dedicated to their complete destruction just NE and SW of their own borders.
THAT is not a good position to be in. I can excuse quite a bit under THOSE circumstances.
Post by: Guest on December 13, 2005, 11:10:50 AM
You live in a really bad neighborhood. The Crips (gang) have moved in and are running completely rampant - killing, looting, raping, etc. The cops aren't doing squat about it.
Would it be OK to find a cop car with no actual cops around, torch it and write "CRIPS 4EVER!" right next to the wreckage, to get the cops to put their lazy butts in gear?
If things were bad enough, sure I'd consider it.
Post by: Guest on December 13, 2005, 12:32:39 PM
In the case of the US/Egypt/Israel, it was more like "the cops were crawling into bed with the crips".
Would THAT warrant a reaction?
I'm not even going to dignify the "they should be our bitch" thing with any comment. None should be needed.
They were (and are) the ones surrounded by lunatics eager to kill them. Lunatics whose existence we not only ignored, but often supported as "anti-communist allies".
Post by: The Rabbi on December 13, 2005, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Blackburn
Why SHOULDN'T they be in a subservient position? They exist at our pleasure.
Hahaha
Post by: Guest on December 13, 2005, 02:37:45 PM
Post by: The Rabbi on December 13, 2005, 03:40:32 PM
Quote from: Blackburn
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't say any of this if Israel conducted themselves in a manner consistent with the Israel of the bible. I'm not even a replacement theologist- my issue is with the Israeli government, not the people. They are no longer the freedom fighters who beat impossible odds to reestablish a Jewish state, and continued to do so to ensure it's survival.
Big Mean Mr. Bush keeps bossing Sharon around to adopt some new stupid peace accord that involves giving land away? Too F'in Bad. If the Israelis were all everyone claims they still are, they wouldn't be giving away their birthright hand over fist and using their soldiers to evict their own settlers.
And your solution is to make Israel a vassal of the US??Big Mean Mr. Bush keeps bossing Sharon around to adopt some new stupid peace accord that involves giving land away? Too F'in Bad. If the Israelis were all everyone claims they still are, they wouldn't be giving away their birthright hand over fist and using their soldiers to evict their own settlers.
You dont see Israel's policies now as fighting to insure Israel's continued survival? You have a lot to learn.
Post by: Guest on December 13, 2005, 03:53:07 PM
Absolutely.
Giving up the "occupied territories" is a slick move. Once they do that, if terrorism still happens then it's obvious the only thing left is their survival at all. All other issues go away, and "the gloves can come off". It opens the door to all options including air superiority.
Do you understand that when Israel deals with terrorism via land war, it's because they're looking for more precision than even close-in airstrikes with smartbombs can achieve? That they're looking to reduce casualties even though it's rougher on their own troops?
Post by: Phantom Warrior on December 13, 2005, 07:15:00 PM
Quote from: Blackburn
Like I said- I'm happy for them to do their own thang. They should just be doing their own thang knowing that if they ever cross us again, Jerusalem becomes fused glass. That'd probably end up actually bringing us some actual peace in the middle east.
Because it's Israel that starts all the wars in the Middle East, including that one right in 1948 when they were barely a state. NOT everyone else.
Post by: richyoung on December 14, 2005, 05:06:28 AM
Quote from: JimMarch
Are they more important than an empty consulate building or three blown up in the middle of the night FIFTY freakin' years ago?
Absolutely.
After Oklahoma City, the World Trade Center twice, numerous embassies, and the USS Cole, I take a darn dim view of people blowing up US property - especially so-called "allies". To be correct, the targets were:Absolutely.
post offices;
USIA libraries in Alexandria and Cairo;
2 Cairo cinemas;
Cairo railway terminal;
Cairo central post office;
an unsuccessful attack on the British owned Rio theater in Alexandria.
Any subsequent attacks were foiled by the arrest of the spy ring.
Lastly, the motivation for the attacks must be examined. While there is a good deal of truth in the reasons put forth by Jim March, it's not the whole story. Israel was attempting to prevent Egypt from nationalizing the Suez canal, AND was seeking to deflect attention away from a disatrous raid that had caused 69 civillian casualties - these factored into the fiasco as well. What is more disturbing is that the President of Israel has recently "honored" the surviving members of the terrorist network for their activities. How can we condemn terror attacks from SOME nations, while ignoring them from others?
Post by: richyoung on December 14, 2005, 05:17:07 AM
Quote from: Phantom Warrior
Quote from: Blackburn
Like I said- I'm happy for them to do their own thang. They should just be doing their own thang knowing that if they ever cross us again, Jerusalem becomes fused glass. That'd probably end up actually bringing us some actual peace in the middle east.
Because it's Israel that starts all the wars in the Middle East, including that one right in 1948 when they were barely a state. NOT everyone else.Post by: richyoung on December 14, 2005, 06:21:42 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
Are they more important than we are?
GOOD QUESTION - especially in light of their stealing our nuclear plans and trading them to the Ruskies for more emmigration....
Post by: Phantom Warrior on December 14, 2005, 08:33:23 AM
Quote from: richyoung
You MIGHT want to check who the agressor was in 1956, 1967, 1978, 1982 and 2002.
Fair enough.1956 Suez War
Israel invades Gaza and the Sinai as part of a deal with Britain and France to help the British regain control of the Suez Canal after it was nationalized by Egypt. Also precipitated by Egyptian harassment of Israel vessels in the Staits of Tiran in clear violation of international law and raiding and infiltration by various Arab countries.
1967 Six Day War
Israel launches a preemptive strike against Egypt, followed by strikes into the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and the Sinai after numerous provocations. Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran (again), which Israel had clearly stated would be considered a casus belli after the Suez War. Admittedly, Israel's response was probably out of proportion under international law, but they did give a fair warning. Also, Egypt was massing troops on Israel's border in the Sinai, including asking the U.N. peacekeeping force to withdraw. Finally, Iraq, Sudan, Kuwait and Algeria were also mobilizing their troops.
I can't find anything on 1978...
1982 Lebanon War
Israel invaded southern Lebanon in response to the significant growth of the PLO (which was and is is very
hostile to Israel) and harassment back and forth between Israeli and PLO forces.
Al-Aqsa Intifada
After two years of unrest and suicide bombings and the capture of the Santorini and the Karine A carrying weapons for Palestinian militants Israel launches operations against Palestinian militants.
Admittedly, Israel launched the first strikes in all of these cases. However, the provocation in each case was tremendous. Consider the fact that Israel is a very tiny state (40 miles across at Jerusalem and only 70 miles across at it's widest) surrounded by states hostile to it's very existence. Israel doesn't have the strategic depth or the population to just sit there and take the first hit. Consider the wars in which Israel didn't launch a preemptive strike...
1948 Arab-Israeli War
Mere days after the expiration of the British Mandate Israel is invaded by a coalition of 40,000 soldiers from seven Arab nations. The Arab force was well-trained and had a tremendous advantage in equipment. Consider the following:
IDF : Arabs
Tanks 1 (w/o gun) : 40
Armored cars (w/ cannon) 2 : 200
Armored cars (w/o cannon) 120 : 300
Artillery 5 : 140
AA and AT guns 24 : 220
Warplanes 0 : 74
Scout planes 28 : 57
Navy (armed ships) 3 : 12
It was generally agreed that Israel would be defeated within weeks. Well, that obviously didn't happen.
1970 War of Attrition
This was a fairly limited war. It can be summed up as Egypt starting fights and violating ceasefires. Read the link for details, it's actually pretty interesting. This is a great quote regarding the third or so ceasefire, "Minutes after the cease-fire Egypt began moving SAM batteries into the zone even though the agreement had explicitly forbidden new military installations. By October there were about 100 SAM sites in the zone."
1973 Yom Kippur War
Israel is attacked ON Yom Kippur (the equivalent of hitting the U.S. on Christmas Day) by a force that outnumbers them 3-1. Troop and tank number given for reference...
IDF : Arabs
Troops 415,000 : 1.2 million
Tanks 1,500 : 3,860
Despite being caught with their pants down initially Israel managed to turn the tide in both the Golan Heights and the Sinai, threaten the Syrian and Egyptian capitals, and trap the Egyptian Third Army. Fortunately, the fact that the Arabs fought well initially, but were eventually defeated made them willing to enter into the peace process at Camp David.
In how many of these instances do you see Israel actively picking a fight? In how many instances do you see Israel getting invaded by several countries at once?
If someone pulls a gun on you how long do you wait before you shoot back? Until you see a gun? Until he's drawing it? Until it's pointed at you? Until the bullet is flying at you? Until you are bleeding? I don't think it's fair to demand the right to self-defense for yourself, but criticize Israel for exercising it.
Post by: Bemidjiblade on December 14, 2005, 09:09:28 AM
Or should they have given their allies time to unite against them, prepare their positions, stock and supply their troops, and launch coordinated offensvies, having publicly declared their intentions to wipe the nation off of the face fo the planet?
I don't carry firearms. So if someone armed is within the 30' rule and starts to draw on me, I'm going to kill him. DRT.
Guess that makes me the evil aggressor?
Edit: i should say that someone who has threatened repeatedly to promise to kill me, and has made the attempt once before, is within striking range and starts to draw on me.
Post by: richyoung on December 14, 2005, 10:56:29 AM
Quote from: Bemidjiblade
Rich Young... What is the definition of preemptive strike?
Depends on who is striking - according to Japan, Dec. 7th was a "preemptive strike" - still just as wrong, though...Quote
Or should they have given their allies time to unite against them, prepare their positions, stock and supply their troops, and launch coordinated offensvies, having publicly declared their intentions to wipe the nation off of the face fo the planet?
I don't carry firearms. So if someone armed is within the 30' rule and starts to draw on me, I'm going to kill him. DRT.
Guess that makes me the evil aggressor?
Edit: i should say that someone who has threatened repeatedly to promise to kill me, and has made the attempt once before, is within striking range and starts to draw on me.
Words and actions are two different things. Whatever the rational, (and it may indeed have been a GOOD rational), the fact remains that Israel STARTED the 67 war AND deliberately attacked a neutral vessel in international waters on an espionage mission to HELP them. What, pray tell, was the reason in 1956, (other than to prevent Egypt from nationalizing the canal?) Lebanon in 78 and 82? Israel seems to want it both ways - "We wuz attacked for no reason!" (as in 48 and 73) when they clearly are struck first, and "These are PREEMPTIVE strikes" when they are clearly the aggressor. Plus I take it personal when Israel chooses to risk MY hide, (as in selling stolen American secrets to the Russians) for THEIR ends - they have no right to do so.
I don't carry firearms. So if someone armed is within the 30' rule and starts to draw on me, I'm going to kill him. DRT.
Guess that makes me the evil aggressor?
Edit: i should say that someone who has threatened repeatedly to promise to kill me, and has made the attempt once before, is within striking range and starts to draw on me.
Post by: Bemidjiblade on December 14, 2005, 12:06:45 PM
Quote from: richyoung
Words and actions are two different things. Whatever the rational, (and it may indeed have been a GOOD rational), the fact remains that Israel STARTED the 67 war AND deliberately attacked a neutral vessel in international waters on an espionage mission to HELP them. What, pray tell, was the reason in 1956, (other than to prevent Egypt from nationalizing the canal?) Lebanon in 78 and 82? Israel seems to want it both ways - "We wuz attacked for no reason!" (as in 48 and 73) when they clearly are struck first, and "These are PREEMPTIVE strikes" when they are clearly the aggressor. Plus I take it personal when Israel chooses to risk MY hide, (as in selling stolen American secrets to the Russians) for THEIR ends - they have no right to do so.
ok.For starters, did I miss a public announcement from the surrounding hostile governments that they no longer want to wipe Israel off the face of the planet? Have they stopped paying the families of homicide bombers money in exchange for their acts of terrorism? For that matter, have they stopped exporting homicide bombers and militants to Iraq?
Why oh why would Israel have to take military action to prevent a hostile foreign power with avowed intentions of their distruction from gaining control of the most crucial shipping venue in the continent? Whatever it might have been, it must have been inconsequential. I mean, both England and France were part of that international action. Obviously there can't have been any reason for that, either.
Using your own logic, then the US must be the aggressor and evil for going to war with Afghanistan and Iraq for those exact same reasons. Why is there this double standard across the world that the Jewish people alone have no right to self-defense?
If you want the people of Israel to not actively engage in intelligence against us, then maybe we should allow them the freedom to engage in the same levels of international militance that we are supporting for our own country.
Why can't I get it out of our head from Desert Storm as we pressured and manipulated Israel into ALLOWING Iraq to launch scuds into their residential districts so that we could follow our own agendas.
You want Israel to trust us, well, we haven't exactly been the most trustworthy or compassionate allies. And for the past 15 years we've been riding their butts to live in peace with the militant islamofascists who support the murder of their women and children in public places.
I'm at a total loss to understand how you have arrived at this blatant double-standard.
I'm not even going into the specifics of nuking Jerusalem if they upset us again. If I genuinely thought that any significan portion of the American people supported such a heinous standard of international relations, I'd have to start rooting for the other side, because we really would be the Imperial Satans the bad guys paint us to be.
Post by: The Rabbi on December 14, 2005, 02:38:57 PM
Quote from: Blackburn
Quote from: Phantom Warrior
Quote from: Blackburn
Like I said- I'm happy for them to do their own thang. They should just be doing their own thang knowing that if they ever cross us again, Jerusalem becomes fused glass. That'd probably end up actually bringing us some actual peace in the middle east.
Because it's Israel that starts all the wars in the Middle East, including that one right in 1948 when they were barely a state. NOT everyone else.I'll add that without Israel the Arab countries would be at each other's throats, so there is not "peace dividend".
Post by: MicroBalrog on December 14, 2005, 10:12:15 PM
Buses on Shabbat, why no.
And I live in Ashdod.
Post by: Phantom Warrior on December 15, 2005, 12:51:08 AM
Quote from: MicroBalrog
Pork/Restaurants, yes. Even despite the various discriminating legislation and regulation against this.
Buses on Shabbat, why no.
And I live in Ashdod.
What?
Buses on Shabbat, why no.
And I live in Ashdod.
Post by: The Rabbi on December 15, 2005, 04:30:08 AM
Quote from: MicroBalrog
Pork/Restaurants, yes. Even despite the various discriminating legislation and regulation against this.
Buses on Shabbat, why no.
And I live in Ashdod.
I am not fam,iliar with the situation in Ashdod but I know that in other parts of Israel busses do run on Shabbos.Buses on Shabbat, why no.
And I live in Ashdod.
So, in a Jewish state inhabited mostly by Jews one can pretty easily buy a commodity that is contrary to Jewish law and equally go to a public facility and violate Jewish law with no(legal) consequences. And that doesn't sound secular to you?
Post by: richyoung on December 15, 2005, 05:11:28 AM
Quote
For starters, did I miss a public announcement from the surrounding hostile governments that they no longer want to wipe Israel off the face of the planet?
Just for the record, are you hopping down the "ends justify the means" bunny trail? Because I remember an Austrian paperhanger who had the same idea...Quote
Have they stopped paying the families of homicide bombers money in exchange for their acts of terrorism? For that matter, have they stopped exporting homicide bombers and militants to Iraq?
Who TAUGHT the Arabs terrorism? Do the words Hagana, Irgun, and Stern Gang ring a bell? The US, (remember, the country Israel ATTACKED in 1967 and SOLD OUT in the late 70's), carries plenty of freight in the world wide struggle against terrorism - a tactic well used by the founders of Isreal up through the Lavon affair and the killing of Gerald Bull (as far as we know...). It's hard to take serious Israel's cries of terrorism when the same countries leaders used to roll barrels of dynamite and nails into Arab markets out of speeding trucks pre-48, and asassinate people in other countries, ( Bull, the Munich killers, etc.).Quote
Why oh why would Israel have to take military action to prevent a hostile foreign power with avowed intentions of their distruction from gaining control of the most crucial shipping venue in the continent? Whatever it might have been, it must have been inconsequential. I mean, both England and France were part of that international action. Obviously there can't have been any reason for that, either.
I missed it - explainto me WHY it is any of ISRAEL'S business if Egypt nationalizes a business inside its borders. Sounds like an internal matter to me....Quote
Using your own logic, then the US must be the aggressor and evil for going to war with Afghanistan and Iraq for those exact same reasons.
Attacks on naval vessels, (USS Cole), aircraft, government buildings, (9/11), and embassies are considered acts of war. If a country harbors parties that are engaging in acts of war, and is unwilling, or unable, to control them, that country forfeits its neutral status - (Panch Villa punitive expidition, Afghanistan, Barbary Coast pirates, Cambodia, Laos, etc.) I will be the first to admit that some of these same issues apply to Israels opponents.Quote
Why is there this double standard across the world that the Jewish people alone have no right to self-defense?
Nobody has a problem with legitimate self-defense, especially when proportionatte to the causus belli. What, pray tell, was Isral "self defending" in 1956? When it deliberately (as proven by intercepted radio communications) attacked a US ship with UNMARKED fighter jets, followed up by torpedo boats and helicopters full of combat troops? Israel wants to have it both ways: get the first lick in, AND claim self-defense. Thats tough logic to chop... Quote
If you want the people of Israel to not actively engage in intelligence against us, then maybe we should allow them the freedom to engage in the same levels of international militance that we are supporting for our own country.
Fine. Just get out of Uncle Sam's billfold, and knock yourselves out.Quote
Why can't I get it out of our head from Desert Storm as we pressured and manipulated Israel into ALLOWING Iraq
Funny. I remember it differently. No body ALLOWED Sadaam to launch home-improved Scud-Bs into Israel OR Saudi Arabia. It was a capability he had without NEEDING permission from ANYONE, nor was any granted. We did suggest Israel migh want to POSTPONE retaliating, in order that we could keep the multinational coalition together that was about to put a STOP to the Scud launching, among other things. I also remember we rushed a Patriot battery to Israel to protect it - a battery that we could have used to protect our own troops, many of whom later died to Scud attack.Quote
to launch scuds into their residential districts so that we could follow our own agendas.
...said agenda being to STOP the launches, among other things...Quote
You want Israel to trust us, well, we haven't exactly been the most trustworthy or compassionate allies.
Trust is EARNED. Remind me - how many Israelli Naval vessels has the US deliberately attacked in international waters? How many Israelli defense secrets have we "traded" to, say Syria? How many Israeli citizens have our intelligence agencies assasinated in foreign countries? In return, even Israel's OWN GOVERNMENT acknowledges that without Nixon sending massive resupply directly out of US war-fighting stocks, on US C-5 aircraft, Isreal would have collapsed in 73. You want trust? Compassion? How about TRYING those responsible for the war crime of the attack on the USS Liberty?Quote
And for the past 15 years we've been riding their butts to live in peace with the militant islamofascists who support the murder of their women and children in public places.
...because, what Israel WAS doing was working SO WELL at achieving peace and stability in the region, you know, that we just HAD to stop it...Quote
I'm at a total loss to understand how you have arrived at this blatant double-standard.
No double standard - I take it personally when ANY country attacks our military, ESPECIALLY without a declaration fo war first. I also don't like a foriegn country taking it upon itself to put ME, MY COUNTRY, and MY COUNTRY'S MILITARY, (which both my father and uncle were in at the time) in danger as a barganing chip to increase immigration. That's not a right Israel has, under ANY moral standard.
Post by: The Rabbi on December 15, 2005, 05:41:45 AM
Post by: richyoung on December 15, 2005, 09:07:37 AM
Post by: Phantom Warrior on December 15, 2005, 10:05:46 AM
Quote
Who TAUGHT the Arabs terrorism? Do the words Hagana, Irgun, and Stern Gang ring a bell? The US, (remember, the country Israel ATTACKED in 1967 and SOLD OUT in the late 70's), carries plenty of freight in the world wide struggle against terrorism - a tactic well used by the founders of Isreal up through the Lavon affair and the killing of Gerald Bull (as far as we know...). It's hard to take serious Israel's cries of terrorism when the same countries leaders used to roll barrels of dynamite and nails into Arab markets out of speeding trucks pre-48, and asassinate people in other countries, ( Bull, the Munich killers, etc.).
Who TAUGHT the Arabs terrorism? The majority of terrorism has been performed by the Arabs, not the Israelis. The Haganah, in particular, was formed primarily to defend against Arabs, not to engage in terrorism. The British cooperated informally w/ the Haganah during the Arab riots in the 1930s to help protect British interests and control the Arab uprising. Irgun and the Stern Gang did engage in straight terrorism, but they were splinter groups. Their decision to splinter was based on the Haganah's policy of restraint.The eventual role of these competing organizations is telling. Haganah was transformed into the Israeli Defense Forces while the splinter groups were outlawed and disbanded.
Wiki on Haganah
If you look at the last 50 years who do you see hijacking airplanes, bombing U.S. interests (Marine Barracks in Lebanon, World Trade Center in 1993 AND 2001, the USS Cole, et. al.), and sending suicide bombers into malls, restaurants, and stores? Not the Israelis.
Oh, interesting tidbit about the Lavon Affair. Regarding the bombs the Israelis left in a post office in Alexandria, the U.S. Information Agency libraries in Alexandria and Cairo, and a British-owned theater:
"The bombs themselves were homemade, consisting of bags containing acid placed over nitroglycerine. The bombs were inserted into books, and placed on the shelves of the libraries just before closing time. Several hours later, as the acid ate through the bags, the bombs would explode.
They did little damage to the targets and caused no injuries or deaths."
Wiki on Lavon Affair
That sounds like some serious freight to me. Call me crazy, but I don't remember the last time the Arabs left a bomb in a building right before closing time that didn't cause any injury or death. All I can remember are the ones they've carried into crowded civilians areas at peak traffic times and touched off.
Once again, the Israelis have engaged in plenty of questionable activity. But they are also surrounded by countries that want them exterminated and have been shafted by the international community more times than I care to count. I don't approve of everything they've done, but there is more than enough blame to spread around.
Post by: richyoung on December 15, 2005, 12:20:58 PM
Quote from: Phantom Warrior
They did little damage to the targets and caused no injuries or deaths."
Wiki on Lavon Affair
That sounds like some serious freight to me. Call me crazy, but I don't remember the last time the Arabs left a bomb in a building right before closing time that didn't cause any injury or death. All I can remember are the ones they've carried into crowded civilians areas at peak traffic times and touched off.
..and how many American service men would have DIED in the US/Egyptian war they were trying to bring about? Just because their BOMBS didn't kill anyone, doesn't mean the end result of their plan wouldn't have been dead Americans, and others, as well.Wiki on Lavon Affair
That sounds like some serious freight to me. Call me crazy, but I don't remember the last time the Arabs left a bomb in a building right before closing time that didn't cause any injury or death. All I can remember are the ones they've carried into crowded civilians areas at peak traffic times and touched off.
Quote
Once again, the Israelis have engaged in plenty of questionable activity.
Here we agree. To use the US as an example, when WE have a My Lai or an Al Grahib, we investigate and punish those who do wrong. Israel either sweeps it under the rug or gives them medals.Quote
But they are also surrounded by countries that want them exterminated and have been shafted by the international community more times than I care to count. I don't approve of everything they've done, but there is more than enough blame to spread around.
I expect them to BE HONORABLE. To DO RIGHT. To NOT BETRAY FRIENDS AND ALLIES. If they will do that, there will be no SHORTAGE of people supporting them - including me. Heck I support them NOW, and think the term "Palastinian" is a cruel hoax - but I do NOT support them blindly, and there IS a LIMIT to how much "deja moo" I'm willing to put with from them.
Post by: The Rabbi on December 15, 2005, 12:32:38 PM
Quote from: Blackburn
Clearly, he can't answer you based on your facts. I see the same thing with blissninnies being confronted with logical arguments against gun control.
I'd like to note that were it not for our massive support that ensured their survival, and for their repeated actions (USS Liberty, espionage, assassinations, etc- I'm not going to dignify the more wacked out anti-israel theories) this thread would not exist.
But the way things are, if they were another nation, say in south america, I'm pretty sure Rabbi would be clamoring for cutting them off. Except, they're "Israel".
In my opinion, if their nation is now secularized, perhaps they are no longer deserving the respect accorded the biblical israel, or the freedom fighters of 1947.
Typically you are incorrect.I'd like to note that were it not for our massive support that ensured their survival, and for their repeated actions (USS Liberty, espionage, assassinations, etc- I'm not going to dignify the more wacked out anti-israel theories) this thread would not exist.
But the way things are, if they were another nation, say in south america, I'm pretty sure Rabbi would be clamoring for cutting them off. Except, they're "Israel".
In my opinion, if their nation is now secularized, perhaps they are no longer deserving the respect accorded the biblical israel, or the freedom fighters of 1947.
All the "facts" marshalled here are worthless. The British invaded us, twice, burning our capitol one of those times and we still supported them in the Falklands War. Silly? Yes, but no more so than the "facts" being bandied about here.
Foreign aid is not doled out on the basis of who is "deserving" any more than on the basis of who has been naughty and who has been nice. It is doled out based on how much leverage we want in that country, how much the promise of such aid will influence that country's policies, and a host of other considerations. Already pointed out was the most, if not all, of Israel's aid actually gets comes in the form of credits and gets spent here.
But among top recipients of aid we find such paragons as Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, and Sudan. Are any of these really our pals? Are any of them "deserving" of support? Do any of them support us in the UN on any consistent basis?
So what is going on in these posts? Why does Richyoung have such a burning desire to prove Israel is our enemy, dredging up 40 year old incidents? I don't know.
And fwiw, I am no supporter of Israel and think they, and we, would be much better off getting out of Uncle Sam's pocket.
Post by: richyoung on December 15, 2005, 12:39:05 PM
Quote from: Phantom Warrior
Who TAUGHT the Arabs terrorism? The majority of terrorism has been performed by the Arabs, not the Israelis. The Haganah, in particular, was formed primarily to defend against Arabs, not to engage in terrorism. The British cooperated informally w/ the Haganah during the Arab riots in the 1930s to help protect British interests and control the Arab uprising. Irgun and the Stern Gang did engage in straight terrorism, but they were splinter groups. Their decision to splinter was based on the Haganah's policy of restraint.
The eventual role of these competing organizations is telling. Haganah was transformed into the Israeli Defense Forces while the splinter groups were outlawed and disbanded.
Wiki on Haganah
Haganah - A History of the Jewish Underground Defense force in PalestineThe eventual role of these competing organizations is telling. Haganah was transformed into the Israeli Defense Forces while the splinter groups were outlawed and disbanded.
Wiki on Haganah
The Revolt against the British
At the conclusion of World War II, it became apparent that Britain would not change its policies in Palestine and would not allow Jewish immigration. The Haganah then joined forces with the Irgun and Lehi in attacking the British in various commando raids and sabotage attacks.
Jewish Virtual Library
At the end of the war, when it became clear that the British government had no intention of altering its anti-Zionist policy, the Haganah began an open, organized struggle against British Mandatory rule in the framework of a unified Jewish Resistance Movement, consisting of Haganah, Irgun Zevai Le'umi - Etzel, and Lohamei Herut YisraelLehi.
...from their OWN mouths...
Post by: richyoung on December 15, 2005, 01:05:19 PM
Quote from: The Rabbi
Typically you are incorrect.
All the "facts" marshalled here are worthless. The British invaded us, twice, burning our capitol one of those times and we still supported them in the Falklands War.
Don't stop there. Israel was quite willing to get into bed with the British as early as 1956. Again, I ask, WHY is Egypt nationalizing the Suez Canal any business of Israel? Still waiting... All the "facts" marshalled here are worthless. The British invaded us, twice, burning our capitol one of those times and we still supported them in the Falklands War.
Quote
Silly? Yes, but no more so than the "facts" being bandied about here.
Putting quotation marks around "facts" doesn't make them any less true...Quote
Foreign aid is not doled out on the basis of who is "deserving" any more than on the basis of who has been naughty and who has been nice.
Luckily for Israel. So you admit their behavior has been excreble?Quote
It is doled out based on how much leverage we want in that country, how much the promise of such aid will influence that country's policies, and a host of other considerations. Already pointed out was the most, if not all, of Israel's aid actually gets comes in the form of credits and gets spent here.
Nobody is twisting their arm to take it - whereas signifigant twisting by U.S. Jewish organizations is ongoing to keep it coming.Quote
So what is going on in these posts? Why does Richyoung have such a burning desire to prove Israel is our enemy, dredging up 40 year old incidents? I don't know.
I'll tell you. 34 dead American servicemen. There STILL has been no investigation/trial/punishment of the instigators of the attack on the Liberty "I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. . . . Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous "
-- US Secretary of State Dean Rusk
"...the board of inquiry (concluded) that the Israelis knew exactly what they were doing in attacking the Liberty."
-- CIA Director Richard Helms
"I can tell you for an absolute certainty (from intercepted communications) that the Israelis knew they were attacking an American ship."
-- NSA Deputy Director Oliver Kirby
"That the Liberty could have been mistaken for the Egyptian supply ship El Quseir is unbelievable"
-- Special Assistant to the President Clark Clifford, in his report to President Lyndon Johnson
"The highest officials of the [Johnson] administration, including the President, believed it 'inconceivable' that Israel's 'skilled' defense forces could have committed such a gross error."
-- Lyndon Johnson's biographer Robert Dallek in Flawed Giant, Oxford University Press, 1998, pp. 430-31)
"A nice whitewash for a group of ignorant, stupid and inept [expletive deleted]."
-- Handwritten note of August 26, 1967, by NSA Deputy Director Louis W. Tordella reacting to the Israeli court decision exonerating Israelis of blame for the Liberty attack.
"The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack...was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew.... It was our shared belief. . .that the attack. . .could not possibly have been an accident.... I am certain that the Israeli pilots [and] their superiors. . .were well aware that the ship was American."
-- Captain Ward Boston, JAGC, US Navy (retired), senior legal counsel to the US Navy Court of Inquiry
That the attack was deliberate "just wasn't a disputed issue" within the National Security Agency
-- Former NSA Director retired Army Lieutenant General William Odom on 3 March 2003 in an interview for Naval Institute Proceedings
Former NSA/CIA Director Admiral Bobby Inman "flatly rejected" the Cristol/Israeli claims that the attack was an accident
-- 5 March 2003 interview for Naval Institute Proceedings
Of four former NSA/CIA seniors with inside knowledge, none was aware of any agency official who dissented from the position that the attack was deliberate
-- David Walsh, writing in Naval Institute Proceedings
"It appears to me that it was not a pure case of mistaken identity."
-- Captain William L. McGonagle, Commanding Officer, USS Liberty, speaking at Arlington National Cemetery, June 8, 1997
"To suggest that they [the IDF] couldn't identify the ship is ... ridiculous. ... Anybody who could not identify the Liberty could not tell the difference between the White House and the Washington Monument."
-- Admiral Thomas Moorer, Chief of Naval Operations and later Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, quoted in The Washington Post, June 15, 1991, p. 14
- had it been the OTHER way around, the numerous Jewish political organizations would be HOWLING for blood. Not to mention the fact that the Isreali president had the NERVE to give letters of recognition to surviving "Lavon Affair" spys DURING a state visit by President Bush. Plus you need to check your calender, Rabi - the Pollard affair, selling Q-37 counter-battery radar technology to Red China, selling F-16/'Lavi" technology to Taiwan during an arms emargo on them - all well within the last 40 years.
Quote
And fwiw, I am no supporter of Israel and think they, and we, would be much better off getting out of Uncle Sam's pocket.
Here we are in profound agreement.
Post by: The Rabbi on December 15, 2005, 01:29:52 PM
Post by: richyoung on December 16, 2005, 04:57:00 AM
Quote from: The Rabbi
But I still want to know why 34 dead servicemen 40 years ago bothers you so much. Why does anything 40 years ago bother you?
The Holocaust was 60 years ago - does it still bother you?Why does whether I was alive n 67 bother you? Why do you refuse to acknowledge that the assassination of Gerald Bull, the stealing of nuclear war plans by Pollard that Israel traded to Russia for increased Jewish immigration, various "honey trap" operations by Mossad against elected U.S. officials - ALL much less than 40 years ago? The attack on the Liberty is but one of the more outragous incidents in a long patern of abuse of the US by Israel. Lets look at how differnt countries handle similar issues:
My Lai: Calley and Medina are court-martialed an punished, with attendant media coverage. Military puts renewed emphasis on training the laws of war.
Liberty: Israel refuses to identify who is responsible for the attacks. Pays 6 million (in 1980) in reparations for the destruction of a 40 million dollar ship - (the Liberty never again sailed on a mission, and was sold as scrap.) Rather than investigate and punish those responsible, Israel HONORS them: the wheel and bell of MTB-203, which launched the fatal torpedo, are displayed in Haifa's Clandestine Immigration and Naval Museum.
FOR THE RECORD: - I believe the Jews are God's chosen people. That without the Jews there would have been no Christ. That Israel can be justifiably proud of the record and reputation her military has established for excellence in combat. That in NO WAY excuses the behaviors I'm bringing up.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on December 18, 2005, 10:36:29 AM
When Egypt actually moved to nationalize the Canal itself, thus setting itself up to control all shipping between Europe and Asia is when the abortive British and French and effective Israeli attack to open the Canal to free international passage and force Egypt to stop illegally restricting Israeli trade began.
Post by: roo_ster on December 18, 2005, 12:23:24 PM
Israel has my support in most their endeavors to thrive/survive, but I am not blind to the fact that they have sold the US out when it was convenient for them. We're both big boys, playing by big boy rules. We should take pains to understand that and all it implies.
To be frank, Israel provides bupkis in the way of return on our investment in their security. Our support for the Israeli gov't is almost entirely a moral one: they are a pretty decent country by Western standards and much better than any of their nutcase neighbors. It is the morally right thing to do to support the decent fellow against the maniacs who menace him. Of course, we pay for our moral stance, in both money and blood. Perhaps that is why we are such a target for damaging Israeli espionage: they know that taking their side against the oil-soaked madmen is really not in our interests as a nation. They figure it won't last forever.
All nations play by big-boy rules. We see the French doing similar things while our back is turned, thwarting our policy objectives while enriching themselves. Other countries do it, too. What makes it different when Israel does it? Why should Americans get more bent out of shape when with Israeli perfidity?
I think there are two reasons:
1. The USA provides much material and moral support to Israel.
Without our material help, Israel as a country would have been wiped out. We would have seen come to pass what Israel's enemies have said they would do all along: push Israel into the sea and slaughter them all. Also, we are usually the only other country that votes with Israel when the usual anti-Israeli measure is voted on by the UN. Most other countries just aren't willing to side with Israel on any issue that puts them at odds with the oil shieks.
So, when Israel steps on its generative member & sells our classified data to the Chicoms or another Pollard is caught, Americans are naturally more than usually agitated. It is one thing to be kicked in the jimmy. It is a whole other thing to be kicked in the jimmy after helping the guy up from where he fell, dusting him off, and defending his character.
2. Too many Americans with dual loyalties or primary loyalties that lie with Israel.
Yep, there are non-Jewish Americans who have a dual-loyalty problem. We've seen them spit on our World Cup soccer players (Mexican-Americans), frag our fighting men (Black Muslims), march in support of the terrorists (American muslims from/with roots in the ME), Chinese Americans that give classified data to the Chicoms, etc.
Those others exist, but are pretty marginal, both politically & socially. There are not to many of any of them in positions of political or cultural influence. They aren't helping to make policy or mold opinion.
OTOH, Israel-first types are pretty thick in the corridors of power, media, and academia...and they don't like having things pointed out to them like:
a. That there is a disproportionate number of them in those endeavors
b. That their policy positions can, at times, promote Israel's interests over the USA's
The usual response ot such observations is rapid-fire accusations of anti-semitism & the like. The storm of accusation works on lots of folks who know something is rotten. After all, not many folks like to be called a racist by folks who buy ink by the drum...and some ask themsleves, "Is it really important enough to point out the dual-loyalties that I ought to risk my reputation among the white zinfandel sippers & brie-eaters?"
Most Americans expect natural born & naturalized Americans to put America first in their heart. When they see that is not the case, many get more than a little cranky at the Israel-firsters and the object of their loyalty. It is enough to make an America-first, Israel supprter like myself a bit uncomfortable...and less gracious the next time Israel buggers the USA.
Post by: Bemidjiblade on December 19, 2005, 12:50:16 AM
Quote
Just for the record, are you hopping down the "ends justify the means" bunny trail? Because I remember an Austrian paperhanger who had the same idea...
No. For the record I am attacking the preposterous notion of moral equality between the nations that have announced intentions of genocide and those that have not. I respect Israel for restraint in dealing with its enemies, a restraint that its opponents have not shown in word or deed. There are good guys and there are bad guys in the world. People who advocate slaughter of millions (Like someone advocating use of Nuclear weapons on Jerusalem, for example) have forfeited my respect. But hey, that was an excellent combination of Ad Hominum and Straw Man arguments.Quote
It's hard to take serious Israel's cries of terrorism when the same countries leaders used to roll barrels of dynamite and nails into Arab markets out of speeding trucks pre-48, and asassinate people in other countries, ( Bull, the Munich killers, etc.).
It's not hard at all when I saw Israeli armed forces forcibly enforcing withdrawals for Jewish settlements for the sake of peace in the same year when Palestinians still voice public support for bombers who murder women and children in public.Quote
Attacks on naval vessels, (USS Cole), aircraft, government buildings, (9/11), and embassies are considered acts of war. If a country harbors parties that are engaging in acts of war, and is unwilling, or unable, to control them, that country forfeits its neutral status - (Panch Villa punitive expidition, Afghanistan, Barbary Coast pirates, Cambodia, Laos, etc.) I will be the first to admit that some of these same issues apply to Israels opponents.
And yet you refuse to accept Israel's need to ensure its own national security, whether or not that happens to coincide with the best interest of the United States. We've certainly worked towards our own national security when it was not in Israel's best interest. The double-standard appears to continue.Quote
I missed it - explainto me WHY it is any of ISRAEL'S business if Egypt nationalizes a business inside its borders. Sounds like an internal matter to me....
Internal affairs, the age-old cry of the oppressor. Saddam's defense in massacering Kurds, eh?Well, Here is the asked-for explanation:
1] Egypt's move for nationalization involved the removal of UN observers.
2] In the 6 days war, the nationalization also violated agreements made at the end of the last armed conflict with Egypt.
3] Egypt's nationalization was a prelude to an almost immediate closure of both the canal and the Straight of Tiran to Isreali traffic. These were the major sources of petrolium for the nation. Modern nations do not run without supplies of petrolium. Therefore this was a threat to Israeli national wellbeing.
4] Israel had already publicly stated that they would view closure of the canal and the straight as acts of war. The Egyptians knew this and did this anyway. You seem to be having trouble w/ concepts of national security, so I will present you with a schoolboy's imagery. If someone says "cross this line and I'll punch you" and you deliberately cross the line, you are asking for a fight. Egypt knew it would be provoking a war with the actions. They got their war when they did it in the form of the 6 days war, and I for one am supremely happy at how thoroughly they got their tukus kicked.
Quote
Israel wants to have it both ways: get the first lick in, AND claim self-defense. Thats tough logic to chop...
We've been over this. The best defense is a good offense. It is better to fight the enemy on their property than to try and fight them off of yours.Quote
Trust is EARNED. Remind me - how many Israelli Naval vessels has the US deliberately attacked in international waters? How many Israelli defense secrets have we "traded" to, say Syria? How many Israeli citizens have our intelligence agencies assasinated in foreign countries? In return, even Israel's OWN GOVERNMENT acknowledges that without Nixon sending massive resupply directly out of US war-fighting stocks, on US C-5 aircraft, Isreal would have collapsed in 73. You want trust? Compassion? How about TRYING those responsible for the war crime of the attack on the USS Liberty?
I've spent the better part of 3 hours looking at info from both sides of the USS Liberty incident. You asked for a trial, both Isreal and the US held military inquiries into the incident. Israel offered a public apology, stating that it was the result of the confusion of the war that was ongoing. Of course, cataclysmic errors never occur during wartime. General Jackson's troops must have known who he was when he was fatally shot. The US Navy must have deliberately allowed the sailors of the USS Indianapolis to die by the hundreds when the ship went down in WWII. The pentagon estimated that 21,000 deaths in WWII were caused by friendly fire.Ultimately, the most compelling reason for me to reject the "Vicious Deceitful Isreal" take on the incident is that I cannot come up with a single way that Isreal stood to benifit from the attack. They had no motive to provoke a war with the US (which very nearly did happen when 2 aircraft carriers responded to the Liberty's distress call) while fighting a coalition of their long-standing enemies.
What happened was tragic. I wish that it had never happened. It is not, for me, sufficient evidence to base a half-century worth of hatred against Israel. Among other things, I would not want the United STates to be judged on a similar standard. Remember the Aspirin factory in the Sudan that we blew up 'cause on Clinton's orders? By the same logic, all of Africa should hate us forever.
The attack on the USS Liberty was a horrible event. We disagree on the levels of culpability and criminality, as well as intent.
"trust is earned".
You object to Israel SELLING arms to China. Your point as I understand it is that it economic or commercial support of a nation's enemies is a betrayal, particularly military support or commerce.
The United States has provided financial aid to Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, all of which are enemies of Israel.
The US has continued to provide aid to Jordan, Palestine, and Saudi Arabia despite documented incidences of these countries supporting terror attacks on Israeli civilians.
The double standard remains.
Post by: richyoung on December 19, 2005, 06:17:51 AM
Quote from: Bemidjiblade
No. For the record I am attacking the preposterous notion of moral equality between the nations that have announced intentions of genocide and those that have not. I respect Israel for restraint in dealing with its enemies, a restraint that its opponents have not shown in word or deed. There are good guys and there are bad guys in the world. People who advocate slaughter of millions (Like someone advocating use of Nuclear weapons on Jerusalem, for example) have forfeited my respect. But hey, that was an excellent combination of Ad Hominum and Straw Man arguments.
No. For the record, you were excusing Israel's aggressive behavior by pointing out how bad the people you were "preemptive striking" were - and where I come from, thats "ends justify the means". Also for the record, *I* didn't advocate nuking Israel, nor do I so believe - I *CAN* understand the frustration that leads to such a comment, and it would behoove Israel and her supports to understand Uncle Sam's patience is running thin. I don't forsee the US nuking anyone in the near future, but Israel better remember we CHOOSE to aid her, and we can just as soon choose NOT to.Quote
It's not hard at all when I saw Israeli armed forces forcibly enforcing withdrawals for Jewish settlements for the sake of peace in the same year when Palestinians still voice public support for bombers who murder women and children in public.
Whether one agrees, or disagrees, with the decision to forcibly evacuate the settlements, one has to admit it is a bold and clear-cut demonstration of Israel's determination to strive to make the peace process work. Now if only her ALLIES could get that level of consideration...Quote
And yet you refuse to accept Israel's need to ensure its own national security,...
NOT at my expense! NOT at my countries expense! DOUBLE-NOT when we are protecting you and funding you!Quote
whether or not that happens to coincide with the best interest of the United States.
Oh that is rich! Really, I'm astounded! Remember the Oil Embargo - against the US? For helping Israel in 1973? We kept her alive, and paid a helluva price in terms of money AND economic misery for it!Quote
We've certainly worked towards our own national security when it was not in Israel's best interest. The double-standard appears to continue.
Pardon me for being so mean-spirited to expect that the criminals who attacked the Liberty, if not tried and punished, at least not be honored as heroes in one of your museums!Quote
The Egyptians knew this and did this anyway. You seem to be having trouble w/ concepts of national security, so I will present you with a schoolboy's imagery. If someone says "cross this line and I'll punch you" and you deliberately cross the line, you are asking for a fight.
That rather depends on whether one has the right to draw the line in the first place. Quadaffi found out he didn't, but internal events inside of Egypt don't rise to causus belli in mine, nor the UN's eyes. Should Isreal be compelled to ship petroleum or war materials across her borders from Egypt to Syria, for example?Quote
We've been over this. The best defense is a good offense.
Funny - the local judges don't seem to buy that when someone just out-and-out sucker-punches someone else: they tend to view "he who threw the first punch" as the aggressor, not defender.Quote
It is better to fight the enemy on their property than to try and fight them off of yours.
...and even better to sieze the Gaza Strip, West Bank, and the Golan Heights while you are at it, huh?Quote
I've spent the better part of 3 hours looking at info from both sides of the USS Liberty incident. You asked for a trial, both Isreal and the US held military inquiries into the incident. Israel offered a public apology, stating that it was the result of the confusion of the war that was ongoing.
Israel LIED! Both linguists on the Liberty itself, as well as Air Force crew on an EC-121 and monitoring stations in the embassy in Tel Aviv intercepted voice messages FROM THE STRIKE AIRCRAFT that prove the attack was on a known American vessel. Only US Naval frequencies, including the distress frequency, were jammed during the attack. Did you miss the list of senior officials in the dfense, State, and intelligence business that say, without reservation, that the attack was deliberate? As for Israel having a "military inquiry", since when does the criminal get to run his own trial?Quote
Of course, cataclysmic errors never occur during wartime. General Jackson's troops must have known who he was when he was fatally shot. The US Navy must have deliberately allowed the sailors of the USS Indianapolis to die by the hundreds when the ship went down in WWII. The pentagon estimated that 21,000 deaths in WWII were caused by friendly fire.
NONE of this has anything to do with ordering unmarked jets to sink a neutral ship and murder the survivors - which is what happened.Quote
Ultimately, the most compelling reason for me to reject the "Vicious Deceitful Isreal" take on the incident is that I cannot come up with a single way that Isreal stood to benifit from the attack. They had no motive to provoke a war with the US (which very nearly did happen when 2 aircraft carriers responded to the Liberty's distress call) while fighting a coalition of their long-standing enemies.
You are that naive? I'll spell it out for you. Unmarked jets attack the Liberty, hopefully destroying their commo capability. (They almost succeed at this - only a jerry-rigged connection between a transmitter and a different system's antenna enabled them to get a distress call out.) The torpedo boats make sure NO ONE gets off alive by raking the decks with .50 cal fire, and destroying any launched lifeboats or rafts. (This mission accomplished. With no survivors, Egypt gets blamed for the attack - (this in fact is what our government thought when the distress call first went out - after all, the attackers were UNMARKED!). Object - draw the US into a war with Egypt under false pretenses. Precedent? This is the SAME thing Israel tried to do with the "Lavan Affair" in the fifties!Quote
What happened was tragic. I wish that it had never happened. It is not, for me, sufficient evidence to base a half-century worth of hatred against Israel.
It isn't for me either,...by itself. Unfortunately, its NOT by itself. Pollard, the Q-37 fiasco, numerous Mosaad "Honey Trap" operations against US officials,...all an ongoing patern of abused trust.Quote
Among other things, I would not want the United STates to be judged on a similar standard. Remember the Aspirin factory in the Sudan that we blew up 'cause on Clinton's orders? By the same logic, all of Africa should hate us forever.
1. The Sudan wasn't supplying us with massive foreign aid.2. The Sudan was in fact harboring terrorists, if not at the aspirin factory.
3. We've spent tons of $$$ trying to HELP post-colonial Africa.
4. A big chunk of the world, including most of Africa, reflexively hates us anyway.
Quote
The attack on the USS Liberty was a horrible event. We disagree on the levels of culpability and criminality, as well as intent.
The Liberty was the most electronically advanced ship in the world - bristling with antennas from stem to stern, including a huge "MoonBounce" round reflector dish. It also was painted grey, almost 500 feet long, had white hull number markings and her name in English painted across the stern. It was also flying a huge American flag. To suppose that this vessle was confused for a 1920's, 250 foot long, silver, LIVESTOCK ship tied up to a dock in Alexandria waiting to be scrapped...by the BEST ARMED FORCE and INTELLIGENCE SERVICE in the WORLD strains credibility beyond the breaking point. Israel was at war - they knew EXACTLY where every enemy and neutral hull within 600 miles was - they flew reconnaisence patrols (which we monitored) for just such a purpose - and they correctly identified the Liberty!Quote
"trust is earned".
You object to Israel SELLING arms to China. Your point as I understand it is that it economic or commercial support of a nation's enemies is a betrayal, particularly military support or commerce.
The United States has provided financial aid to Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, all of which are enemies of Israel.
Egypt an enemy of Israel? I thought you were at peace with them? I thought that's why Sadat got the Nobel Peace prize? Are ou saying things have changed? (..and, BTW, that WAS the US that brokered that peace deal...)You object to Israel SELLING arms to China. Your point as I understand it is that it economic or commercial support of a nation's enemies is a betrayal, particularly military support or commerce.
The United States has provided financial aid to Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, all of which are enemies of Israel.
As for Jordan, they've had their own problems with the PLO, and along with Kuwait, have been a moderating influence among the more virulent pan-Arabists. In fact King Hussein was secretly negotiating with Golda Mier and Abba Eban for THREE YEARS with regards to secure borders and a lasting peace...until the IDF attacked Es Samu in the Jordanian West Bank with over 3000 troops, tanks, and fighters - AFTER being reassured THAT MORNING that Israel had no intention of attacking Jordanian territory (13 November, 1966). So Israel "pooped in its own mess kit" on that on!
As for Syria, they helped fight GWI, and we need their help on the border regions to find AL-Quieda operatives.
Now, since you brought it up, just WHAT, other than $$$, did Israel need from Red China so desperately that they sold us out on the Q-37?
Quote
The US has continued to provide aid to Jordan, Palestine, and Saudi Arabia despite documented incidences of these countries supporting terror attacks on Israeli civilians.
...and we continue to provide aid to Israel despite documented war crimes, espionage, and attempting to drag us into war with Arab nations under false pretenses....
Post by: richyoung on December 19, 2005, 06:54:35 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
I was only suggesting that we drop a nuke on Israel in parody of the inbred rapscallions who think it would be a brilliant tactical maneuver to drop nuclear weapons on Iran, or Mecca.
I know, Blackburn - I "got it". It's just that Jews in general and the citizens of Isreal in partticular are understandably quite sensitive to any suggestion of mass killing/extermination. I've been to the ovens at Dachau and felt the palpable evil and despair soaked into the very bedrock there - if you've never experienced it, there is no way I can explain it to someone. Hard as it may be for the Rabi and such to believe, but I support Israel and admire their armed forces prowess: I just don't give them a free pass to poop all over me or my country.
Post by: Gewehr98 on December 19, 2005, 07:03:57 AM
Quote
Magnum Research, of Minnesota, actually makes the Desert Eagle. IMI did help Magnum Research with some design issues when the Desert Eagle was first introduced (hence this persistent myth), but it's actually a Magnum Research gun.
A detailed history is available on the Modern Firearms webpage.
Pretty damned persistent "myth", if I do say so myself. I have in my collection a very early Mark I Desert Eagle pistol, and it was in fact manufactured in Israel:A detailed history is available on the Modern Firearms webpage.
MRI was founded in Minneapolis in 1979, and started design on the "Magnum Eagle" pistol. The prototype was almost ready by 1981, but needed help with feeding and cycling. MRI got help from none other than IMI, resulting in the first Israeli Desert Eagle pistol production in 1983. My Desert Eagle above dates to 1986, and was also made in Israel.
The Persian Gulf War put civilian firearms manufacture on hold at IMI, so manufacturing was moved to Saco Defense in the state of Maine from 1995 to 1998. Since then, Magnum Research, citing concerns over quality control, has once again switched production of the Desert Eagle back to Israel.
Just wanted to clarify where the big pistols actually come from. I now return to the Israel = good/Israel = evil thread.
(I have this book, By Way of Deception, if anybody wants to read about the Mossad...)