Cite?
Not that it’s relevant to the topic of people in the Middle-East blaming Israel for taking sides, usually with some justification. Nor in the least relevant to the well documented cooperation of present day Israel with Al-Qa’ida / Nusra which is what this post is about.
Ignoring the rest of your flimsy diatribe. Israel is a sovereign nation. Israeli leaders have quite good reasons to believe that even if the US did protest any actions they make as being unacceptable, there will be no actual consequences in the form of changes in US support of Israel.
I realise this is slightly off-topic, but there is a rapidly growing divide between the US and Israel over foreign policy e.g. Obama-Netanyahu Rift Threatens US-Israel Bond
Israel providing medical aid to Nusra al-Qa’ida fighters who could quite easily have been injured in US/Coalition bombing is sure to cause tensions. Even if they weren’t actually injured by US bombs, Nusra al-Qa’ida is a single organisation in Syria and fighters move to wherever they are needed. A fighter patched up by Israel could easily end up in Aleppo replacing one killed by the US.
Given the caliber of the OP’s posted links in this thread and another recent thread, I don’t think you’ll have much company there.
Not sure Israel is actively helping either of them, but Al Qaida and ISIS are just a bunch of ragtag towelheads running around making a nuisance of themselves and the people they prey on in Syria/Iraq, but not much of a threat to Israel. Israel sees Iran as the great threat, and Al Qaeda/ISIS are opposed to Iran (and allied with SA which is also Israel’s ally) and actively degrading Hezbollah quite aggressively which has lately engaged Israel with more success than pretty much anybody else. The Syrian rebels also destabilized the Syrian regime which was seen as something a little more threatening than Ql Qaida/ISIS. So the enemy of your enemy. Israel doesn’t really need to do anything though. Just stand back.
Gee you’re hard to please. Wall Street Journal, Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel are low calibre?
Did you actually read any of them?
And except for a few nudges here and there to keep its border with Syria safe and to prevent any game-changing weapon systems from reaching Lebanese territory, standing back is basically what Israel’s been doing.
At least Israel has an established policy, unlike the West’s ADD-riddled approach. “The Assad regime used poison gas - let’s bomb them!” “ISIS just defeated the Iraqi army - now let’s bomb them!”.
The rift between Hamas and Iran also became Israel well I’m sure. All sides in Syria have accused the other sides of being allied with Israel since day one. Odds are pretty good that rumors of any substantial Israel aid to Al Qaida are simply repeating Assad propaganda.
As far as I know, Israel is usually considered part of the West.
I’m pretty sure we’re in the Middle East.
Right. ‘Towelheads’ is going to earn you a warning, Rune. Please avoid such terms in the future.
West of Euphartes, and East and South of Bosphorus, that would be the “Near East”.
Personally, I’ve always preferred the “Levant”. “Levantine” has a nice sound to it.
Yeah. I guess I’m not really that concerned about upsetting the tender feelings of ISIS/Al Qaida since they’re a bunch of murdering slave-holding raping torturing bastards, but whatever. I guess thugs is off the table too.
And Australia & New Zealand are way over there, but still Western. It really isn’t a matter og geography.
In terms of culture and government, Israel is a Western country, mostly. However, its approach to Middle Eastern geopolitics is, perforce, that of a local and not of an outsider. I’d think that would be obvious.
True. Israel is as Near/Middle Eastern as Australia and NZ are Far Eastern, it is another colonial enterprise, just like them.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
That can make for unusual bedfellows.
And the USA. You guys should clear out and head back to Bristol.
All of which is utterly irrelevant, Rune. Any form of hate speech and such - no matter the justification - will not be tolerated.
Irrelevant. My actual point is that US policy on the ongoing unpleasantness in Syria is all over the place. Therefore, you can’t declare that Isreal’s current policy is against longstanding US policy. The US doesn’t have a longstanding Syria policy, other than “no ground troops”.
Well, I’m not reading anything behind a pay-wall. And, of course, you’re just breezing by your linking to a blog. Yet antoher nifty question is, given Terr’s demonstration of your assertion vs. your link, have you read (and understood) what you’ve linked?