The ME countries hated the US before it ever got involved with Israel. They hate the US because of its meddling in the region - which would go on whether or not the US supported Israel. Meddling is more or less endemic in a superpower.
I can’t wait for a US politician to back the “support Iran in its nuclear ambitions” policy. Regardless of its merits, that has zero chances of success domestically - and not I thonk because Jewish lobbyists pay big bucks to oppose it.
Iran’s growing meddling and nuclear ambitions are hardly a matter of interest only to Israel. You think the Saudis are happy about that? (You do know that the Sunnis and Sh’ites don’t get on well, right?)
You do realize that Iran and the “other oil producing countries” hate each other more than either hate Israel, right? And that Sunni fanatics hate the US more for supporting the Saudis (and stationing troops there) than for supporting Israel?
In short, you are waaaay overestimating the difference to US positioning in the ME if it were to suddenly drop Israel as an ally. All that would do would embolden already-existing enemies by proving conclusively what they have been saying all along - that the US cannot be trusted, will not support its friends, and that they can simply outlast the US. It would not turn those enemies into friends or even substantially lessen their emnity, which has multiple sources.
I did not intend to suggest you did it consciously. I was just covering all the bases because other people read these threads and they may not be aware of our long-standing, functional, productive real military alliance with Turkey.
Were you there before or after the Iraq War was threatened and about to get started? It was night and day for me. Their attitude is just a reflection of our policy in both countries. The Turkish public has soured due to the magic of Bush.
It was well-poisoning plain and simple, something you are continuing to do with the bogus claim that it was to head off the inevitable accusation.
What did Israel have to do with Saddam invading Kuwait in 1991? Because that is the root cause of the US military presence in the Middle East, it has nothing to do with Israel. As Malthus noted, US-Israeli relations were not very close up through the '67 war. The primary sources of Israeli military hardware were France and Britain.
[QUOTE=Inbred Mm domesticus]
Were you there before or after the Iraq War was threatened and about to get started? It was night and day for me. Their attitude is just a reflection of our policy in both countries. The Turkish public has soured due to the magic of Bush.
[/QUOTE]
I was in Turkey in the early 90’s. I can imagine that Bush has had that effect on a LOT of countries.
Anyone who knows Iranian history is well aware that Iranian resentment of the US is rooted in the 1953 Coup.
You don’t have to believe me. Read these quotes:
Note that this was at a time when the US was highly unfriendly with Israel. In fact, in the '56 War, the same US president who approved the '53 coup in Iran, forced Israel to give back the gains it had made (with co-conspirators UK and France).
I could do similar exercises for other nations, but the Iranian situation is the one of greatest import.
So, as you can see, the reasons for Iranian hatred of the US long predate US support for Israel.
The problem is, as usual, that people in the West tend to have a very limited knowledge of the history of the ME and to be focused to the point of myopia on the Arab-Israeli issue. It is only one of many, many issues, and not the prime motivator people think it is.
Continued meddling is not the solution. Only a fool looks at a problem and says “well its been a problem for too long, can’t do anything about it now”. The point is to begin to change the conversation. They think we’ve meddled too much? How about 50 years of support from the US and a hands-off policy on Israel? The ME children of 2062 won’t have the same ire against the US that the ME children now have against us
As North Korea, Pakistan, and India have shown us, if a country has decent military spending, the will to get a nuke, the ability to ignore criticism, and perseverance, they have a good chance to get a nuke. I know we’ve probably bribed, threatened, or secretly obstructed other countries from getting nukes (Libya, South Africa), but I don’t think those tactics will work in Iran. Right now, Iran seems to be the biggest kid on the block over there. If they want a nuke, they’ll get one. Its not that I think the Saudis or Jordan or Kuwait would be happy if Iran got a nuke, it seems pretty inevitable, and part of the reason I think that resonates not only with the Iranian government but the Iranian people is that threats exist, even from the good and moral US, and that having a bomb is better than not having it. If anything, it prevents invasion
There’s a lot of hatred over there. I don’t think one can definitively state that this country is hated more than that country. Right now, their anger is focused through the lens of one strategic liability, an outpost we have to defend though it offers us no protection, whose mere existence incenses locals. We don’t need the Israelis. Let them stand on their own
I think that is a silly belief. It requires a lot of speculation on the minds of those in the ME. I think you ought to be less suspicious.
They won’t welcome us with open arms like Dick Cheney thinks, but it will be one thing off their list that they hate us over. And over time, not just years but decades, who knows what the next generation will think? All we know for sure is that right now, our decades long support of Israel has really made the US no better off.
Take a joke once in a while. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar :rolleyes:
The US has supported Israel before the Gulf War. The US meddled in the ME long before the Gulf War. Just because some people want to use current bases as a catalyst doesn’t mean those are the cause. They are simply the symptoms of a much deeper illness
Absolutely 100% correct, and thanks for the links and the recap!
With regards to Iran, the distrust certainly goes way back.
But I wonder if the same is true for the Middle East at large? How widespread were anti-American views in the Middle East at large (not just in Iran) before 1967 (or whenever American support for Israel really kicked into high gear)?
American meddling in the region, broadly speaking, (and consequent anti-American views) goes right back to the founding of America - to give an example, the very first formation of a navy by the US was in response to the Barbary pirate issue, and the Marine Corps. song relects this “… from the halls of Moctezuma to the shores of Tripoli …”.
However, the real genesis of US interest in, and meddling in, the ME from a modern POV relates to three issues:
The dissolution of European imperialism following WW2
Increased interest in ME oil
The Cold War
These three basically pulled the US into involvement in the region. European retreat opened the space for a scramble by the US and Soviets to fill the void, in terms of exerting influence.
Various ME countries played one superpower off against another (to give a prime example, Egypt - which went from being highly subsidized by the US, who gave it free grain in the early 60s, to highly subsidized by the Soviets, who gave it free arms, to booting out the Soviets, to highly subsidized by the US again).
Support for any government or faction does not translate into goodwill - on the contrary, it creates lasting resentment. This has bitten the US repeatedly (see how support for the Shah of Iran = resentment by Iranians). It has also bitten, and continues to bite, the Russians (support for the current government of Syria = resentment by Syrians).
American support for the Saudis, for another example, translated into such resentment on the part of (Saudi) Bin Laden that it was a prime motive for the 9/11 attack.
In short, the cold war antics of the US and the Soviets (now Russians) created, and continues to create, a groundswell of anger against both throughout the ME. This has been there from the beginning, and Israel is only a small part of it.
Read what Sayyid Qutb, the intellectual founder of radical Islam said about the US in the 50s.
I know lots of people think that the US is hated because we’re seen as supporters and/or puppets of the Jews, but the idea that Israel is the source of our conflicts with various parties in the region is a myth.
People will notice Bin Laden declared war on the US not after the Intifada, but in response to the US having troops in Saudi Arabia and the thought of infidel boots desecrating the land of Mecca and Medina outraged him.
The US is unlikely to retreat into isolationism. Nor is it proved that isolationism is the better policy.
No doubt the Iranians have excellent reasons to want a nuke.
I don’t understand. You say in one sentence that you cannot conclude that one country is more hated than another, and in the very next sentence state that their anger is focused on Israel.
I leave aside the argument that because some people hate another country, it is good policy to appease that hatred.
I would merely point out that the US does not support Israel out of fear that Israel would be unable to stand on its own, it does so in order to have leverage.
How else to make sense out of the US policy to provide military spending to both Israel and Egypt?
The notion that Israel is an “outpost” that the Arabs would sweep into the sea without US support simply defies reality.
The “silly belief” is that all people in the ME care about is the US relations with Israel. As if Iranians think “sure, they overthrew our democratic government, and helped impose a freaking Shah on us instead - but you know what really gets my goat? Those bastards support Israel - you know, that country we don’t even have a common border with”.
Hatred of the US is simply the price the US pays for being a superpower. If it wants that hatred to cease, it should stop being rich and powerful, and asserting its influence.
Become as poor and as put-upon as any third world country, and they won’t hate you.
Withdrawing support from Israel will not have the effect you desire. What it will do, is remove much of the influence the US currently exerts over Israel - making the Israelis rather more militant than they are now.
Own up to well poisoning once in a while. Sometimes thinking you’re going to be accused of anti-Semitism is paranoia, projection or an attempt to preemptively portray any disagreement with you. The absurdity of the “any disagreement with Israel is met with the accusation of anti-Semitism” has grown beyond thin. Opening a response to the topic with it smells of a sentence starting with ‘I’m not a racist, but.’
What do any of these have to do with what I said, which is that the root cause of the US military presence in the ME was Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, which has nothing to do with Israel. It was you who blamed the US military presence in the Middle East and military conflicts in the Middle East on Israel when that clearly is not the case. The 9/11 attacks didn’t even have anything to do with US backing of Israel; bin Laden was offended by the presence of infidel boots on the ground in Saudi Arabia. US forces were only there in response to the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, something Israel had nothing to do with.
That’s because the US has a habit of supporting dictatorial strongmen who promise us stability in exchange for looking the other way.
Who said we were going to be isolated? Support ME governments except for Israel is not an isolationist policy
I cannot state that one non-Israel country is more hated than another. If you throw Israel into the mix, I can definitely say that based on just what we can see without having to peer into men’s hearts, Israel is more hated. In fact, their hate is probably keeping the other ME countries’ hatred of each other in check. Even if you don’t believe in some intrinsically greater hatred of Israel, the fact that policies and statements done by the other ME countries have specifically been geared to make their population hate the Israelis should be acknowledged to have had some effect over the past 60 years or so
The US isn’t really benefiting in any way by our allegiance to Israel. Its not an appeasement issue, its an issue of “Why are we purposefully pissing off countries we don’t need to be pissing off?” issue. Dumping Israel as an ally benefits the US, that should be the only consideration
Is your contention that our alliance with Israel is solely for the purpose of using our influence to make them behave in a way we want them to?
I’m going to just stop you here and not reply to the rest of your paragraph there, because you are arguing from a false premise that I’ve never made. Again, it is silly to think that those in the ME will never trust the US no matter what we do, that they would always simply take our actions, even if beneficial, to be some shadow conspiracy designed to wipe them out from the back door.
We hated the English for a long time after we broke away, now we’re the best of allies. That didn’t happen overnight, but it probably wouldn’t have happened if we continually pissed them off on some issue where they held dear. By removing Israel as an obstacle, AGAIN let me make this clear: we won’t be hugging and singing Kumbaya overnight, but it will reduce some tensions, possibly a lot, and if we can show ourselves to be staunch allies, over time, they will begin to trust us again. Right now we have the baggage of decades of meddling, Israel, and idiots spouting off about having crusades in the ME. Of course they hate us, I kind of hate us too. But that won’t be the case in 50 years if we change our behavior
Thin to you, but plenty of discussions here ends up with accusations. Its a popular theme not only online, but in American politics. Really, I shouldn’t have to spell it out for anyone. We’ve all seen where even if Obama doesn’t go lockstep with Netanyahu on some arbitrary red line, the GOP accuses him of throwing Israel under the bus. Get over it, its a reality. So I made the joke, so what?
You tried to infer that my stance was that Israel was the ONLY cause of ME anger. Since that was wrong, I told you that there are plenty of past causes of ME hatred towards us.
No, they don’t.
I think I’ve seen a total of two people directly called anti-Semites here, and maybe a small handfull where it was implied without a Pitting. One of the two people who’s openly been called an anti-Semite was banned for trolling Jews, so that narrows down the field. On the other hand, a great many claim that they will be called anti-Semites, and decry the injustice of such an unfair hypothetical which never actually comes to pass anyways.
That is, your claim is simply fictional.
And you made the ‘joke’ to poison the well and for the reason everybody else whose argument is weak needs to open with a distractor, be it “I’m not a racist, but…” or “Well you’ll probably call me an anti-Semite for this, but…”
Finn, I thought we had an understanding. I don’t read your posts and you don’t read mine. I’m happy that way, you’re happy that way. We’re both happy. We didn’t work out, you and I, and its better to just have a clean break. I’m keeping the ring though.
So given the fact that “You can’t criticize Israel without being called an anti-Semite” is laughably false, and given that it’s blatantly obvious that a non-zero percentage of people who criticize Israel are indeed anti-Semitic about it, what function do you think preemptively predicting and handwaving claims of anti-Semitism is actually supposed to serve? Why would someone use such a meme when it’s in contravention to the truth?
I’ll leave these two comments together. Really, they speak for themselves.
Somehow, the US is going to “ME governments except for Israel” even though you have just told us the US is disliked “because the US has a habit of supporting dictatorial strongmen who promise us stability in exchange for looking the other way”.
How does this make any sort of sense?
No, you are simply wrong, and are pulling assumptions out of thin air here. True, Israel makes a handy whipping boy and distraction, but you are mistaking buzz for reality.
In short, it is an appeasement issue. What do you think appeasement means?
No, but that is a major benefit of it. Same as the US “special relationship” with Egypt.
It’s a premise necessary for your argument to make any sort of sense.
What I’m saying is that breaking off with Israel to appease Israel-haters isn’t going to have any significant effect on US-haters, because support for Israel isn’t the prime mover of ME dislike for the US. Particularly not in the main focus of trouble these days, which is Iran.
I didn’t infer anything, I was replying to what you said:
US troops and bases hanging around the Middle East have nothing to do with Israel. There were no US troops and bases hanging around the Middle East until the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the forcible ejection of Iraq from Kuwait in 1991, and the presence of US forces in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in the aftermath of that war. None of them are there because of Israel or anything Israel has done. The US does not station forces in Israel, nor does Israel wish to have US forces stationed there. As I noted in the other thread linked to dealing with this very same issue, the word alliance isn’t even the proper word for the relationship between the US and Israel. The US and Israel have never fought alongside each other, and neither is obliged to come to the other’s aid in the event they are attacked.
They do? Find me three of them; it should be easy since plenty of them happen here. Only discussions where the accusation wasn’t patently true, so nothing by Sevastopol, thanks.
Regardless of its merits, that has zero chances of success domestically - and not I thonk because Jewish lobbyists pay big bucks to oppose it.