Israel could sustain and win a short war against anyone. However, without the logistical support of the US and other Western Allies, they could never maintain a prolonged war. They simply lack the resources to rearm themselves. Such a long war without the support of their friends would undoubtedly end with mushroom clouds over the ME and the rest of the world. They know that, and they know that the rest of the world knows that. That leaves the US in the delicate position of supporting one democratic theocracy at the angst of the entire ME. This situation cannot last forever. Bush has to do something to rekindle the peace process.
What nonsense. There are no Israeli troops in Iraq.
Regards,
Shodan
Then why?
People forget that much of what we are dealing with (in the ME) is the legacy of the First World War! The incessant fighting and instability of the region is largely because 4 elderly men in Versailles, France, met in 1919 , and set up the map of the ME.
Countries that had no historical legitimacy were set up …like Iraq (a conglomeration of 3 mutually hostile tribes)…others like Lebanon, were puposefully made up of natuarl enemies, so as to insure compliance with the colonial masters(France).
Looking to the future, who knows what the region will look like. It DOES look bad for Israel…early in the next century, Israel will most likely have an arab majority… will it still then be a jewish state? I think that there ought to be an international conference on the Middle East…perhaps we can undo some of the wrongs of 1919! :eek:
At this point, you are forcing me to make the standard SDMB response. It goes something like this…cite?
That doesn’t explain current support or lack of.
Israel has always struck me as a European country.
It comes down to rational ignorance again. It’s worthwhile for Israel to spen millions and millions of dollars to lobby our law makers for aid packages etc. How much is it worth to an individual American to study and lobby our law makers for a more moderate aid packages for Israel?
Israel’s just another one of thousands of PAC suckling at the teat of the American taxpayer.
Rational ignorance is the single greatest enemy of our form of government.
Maybe some Americans. UbL has cited those events more than once.
The ‘Arab Rebellion’ was sold on self determination for Arabs. That of course was thwarted.
Instead, Western Powers had a series of secret agreements to divvy up te spoils. This led to Britain’s Mess in Mesopotamia that she was only too glad to get out of.
Oddly enough, it was somehwat like what we are doing in Iraq today- establish a nominally local governing body and get the eff out of the situation as much as we can.
This is a deja vu of sorts for Iraq.
For comparison to UK’s Mess in Mesopotamia:
“We go to liberate not to conquer.”
"Our military operations have as their object the defeat of the enemy, and the driving of him from these territories. In order to complete this task, I am charged with absolute and supreme control of all regions in which British troops operate; but our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators. Since the days of Halaka your city and your lands have been subject to the tyranny of strangers, your palaces have fallen into ruins, your gardens have sunk in desolation, and your forefathers and yourselves have groaned in bondage. Your sons have been carried off to wars not of your seeking, your wealth has been stripped from you by unjust men and squandered in distant places.
It is the wish not only of my King and his peoples, but it is also the wish of the great nations with whom he is in alliance, **that you should prosper even as in the past, when your lands were fertile, when your ancestors gave to the world literature, science, and art, and when Baghdad city was one of the wonders of the world. **
On the other hand, the Germans and the Turks, who have despoiled you and yours, have for 20 years made Baghdad a centre of power from which to assail the power of the British and the Allies of the British in Persia and Arabia. Therefore the British Government cannot remain indifferent as to what takes place in your country now or in the future, for in duty to the interests of the British people and their Allies, the British Government cannot risk that being done in Baghdad again which has been done by the Turks and Germans during the war.
It is the hope of the British Government that the aspirations of your philosophers and writers shall be realised and that once again the people of Baghdad shall flourish, enjoying their wealth and substance under institutions which are in consonance with their sacred laws and their racial ideals.
Many noble Arabs have perished in the cause of Arab freedom, at the hands of those alien rulers, the Turks, who oppressed them. It is the determination of the Government of Great Britain and the great Powers allied to Great Britain that these noble Arabs shall not have suffered in vain. It is the hope and desire of the British people and the nations in alliance with them that the Arab race may rise once more to greatness and renown among the peoples of the earth, and that it shall bind itself together to this end in unity and concord.
O people of Baghdad remember that for 26 generations you have suffered under strange tyrants who have ever endeavoured to set on Arab house against another in order that they might profit by your dissensions. This policy is abhorrent to Great Britain and her Allies, for there can be neither peace nor prosperity where there is enmity and misgovernment. Therefore I am commanded to invite you, through your nobles and elders and representatives, to participate in the management of your civil affairs in collaboration with the political representatives of Great Britain who accompany the British Army, so that you may be united with your kinsmen in North, East, South, and West in realising the aspirations of your race. "
Subsititute ‘terrorists’ for Germans and Turks and Coalition for British, then re-read.
Oh really? I thought they were an ally, you know a nation that helps you out in times of war. Particularly when their armed forces are situated right next door.
Thanks for clearing that one up though. Not an ally.
You first.
Well distilled IMHO
The following links to an essay by Clive James called ‘Palestine and the high price of hatred’.
It’s a typical feisty James piece, in which he argues the case for the state of Israel as well as a Palestinian state - that outcome which seems so easy in principle and yet so difficult to effect. For those of you not familiar with him, James is an Australian broadcaster and writer who studied at Cambridge (UK) and spent many long hours (when not acting in revue) in the British Museum studying transcripts of the Nuremberg trials. He’s an implacable enemy of appeasement with the Nazi memory (he wrote some polemical stuff about Albert Speer when Hitler’s architect attempted to develop a new persona as cultural icon in the late 70s) and has otherwise pretty impeccable liberal credentials. Not a Maggie fan, unlike me, for example. But he’s one of my heroes, just a rung or two beneath C.S. Lewis and Karl Popper.
The website by the Malaysian fellow is interesting in its own right, for those who might be interested.
I’m not sure if this link will work. Only one way to find out…
‘Given all the difficulties and costs associated with support of Israel, why is it in the United States’ vital interest to support the state?’
I think James’s article touches on one reason: what might be called the moral imperative.
Israeli intelligence and military operatives are now quietly at work in Kurdistan, providing training for Kurdish commando units and, most important in Israel’s view, running covert operations inside Kurdish areas of Iran and Syria. Israel feels particularly threatened by Iran, whose position in the region has been strengthened by the war. The Israeli operatives include members of the Mossad, Israel’s clandestine foreign-intelligence service, who work undercover in Kurdistan as businessmen and, in some cases, do not carry Israeli passports.
2004-06-28
You might as well ask, “Why does the U.S. protect South Korea? Why does the U.S. protect Taiwan? Why did the U.S. protect Europe from the Soviet Union?”
The answer is because they are ALLIES. Fellow democracies, who have sworn peace with the United States and with whom the U.S. has become culturally, economically, and militarily linked.
There are plenty of realpolitik reasons as well. For instance, if the U.S. pulled aid from Israel, Israel’s economy might go into the dumper. If that happens, and it can’t fund its military, we may see an increase in agression from the Arab side. Eventually, there could be another war, and this time Israel might wind up using nukes. Or perhaps if Iran believes that Israel is no longer a U.S. ally it will decide that it can risk dropping the Bomb on Tel Aviv.
When all is said and done, the fact is that Israel is surrounded by hostile dictatorships that would like nothing more than to see Israel destroyed. You can claim it’s all about the Palestinians, but it’s not. Israel has been under constant threat of attack from its neighbors from the day it became a state.
Israel has its flaws (mostly borne of desperation and a hardening of attitudes that years of terrorism have created), but it is essentially a good, moral country. Its neighbors are not. I can understand criticism of certain Israeli policies - I criticise some of them myself. What I can’t understand is how anyone who believes in human rights can possibly take the side of Israel’s enemies, or want to abandon Israel to fight it out with those enemies on its own.
No sane politician would want direct support from Israel during a military operation in the middle east, even if the Israeli prime minister was begging on his knees to offer troops, planes, etc…
I certainly don’t think that the current US admnistration is very sane to begin with, but not to the point of wishing to have Israeli troops in Irak.
In fact, during the first Gulf War, after Iraq hit Israel with Scuds, and Israel wanted to respond, the US asked them not to, and being American allies, the Israelis didn’t.
Not necessarily a bad thing, even from a purely egoistical point of view.
First, a large number of these educated people are going to stay, hence participate in the US prosperity, because their prospects are better there
Second, even the ones who will come back to their country of origin will like ly have a positive feeling towards the US and an insider understanding of this country. And having elites in foreign countries favorably disposed towards you is certainly a good thing for the future. For instance, people involved in foreign affairs in many countries go out of their way to try to notice promising foreign young people and offering them stays, “study” travels, trainings, visits, etc…just for this purpose.
I don’t get what you mean. Could you elaborate?
Sure
The germans gave Israel a submarine , designed to fire cruise missiles , this gives the Israelis a second strike capability for their nuclear force.
I take it this is not what you wanted elaborating on.
The next part had to do with what happens when a trusted ally breaks the faith , as the french did, right now Israel could probably conquer half the middle east , on its own resources , and glass the other half.
Remaining friends and keeping the pipeline of spare parts available , exerts a degree of control, that keeps Israel on a practical leash.
The Israelis had and probably still have a saying ,from after the war
NEVER AGAIN
If someone is threatning to send jews to the ovens again, this time , the offending party is going to be consumed in a nuclear hellfire and so it should be.
But having said that , I can’t say that I want them in a dominant position , like in control of a lot of oil feilds either.
Feel free to ask for any further clarification
Declan