# Why is support of Israel such a huge requirement for American politicians? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 9, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604 "2009-01-09T22:53:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/61 "2009-01-11T23:57:57Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Undoubtedly there are other groups, but AIPAC is the big fish. You seem to assume that laws are passed just because of lobbying groups. Granted, lobbying groups are important but individual support is important too. If you are a senator from a state with a signficiant Christian population, it makes political sense to vote in favor of a law like this. Why do you think Sarah Palin kept an Israeli flag in her office in Juneau long before she was picked as a VP candidate? Do you think AIPAC got to her? > [@](#): > > They are consistently ranked as one of the most powerful and influential lobbying groups. The NRA is consistently ranked as powerful and influential, and yet gun control laws it opposes get put through now and then. They are powerful, but not all-powerful. The Israel lobby is the same way. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/62 "2009-01-12T00:33:21Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > You seem to assume that laws are passed just because of lobbying groups. No, this is something you made up inside your head. > [@brazil84](#): > > Granted, lobbying groups are important but individual support is important too. If you are a senator from a state with a signficiant Christian population, it makes political sense to vote in favor of a law like this. I don’t think anyone doubts that there are people that support Israel in the United States. The point of a lobby is that you organize these people into a voting block. Through money and organization, that voting block begins to punch above its weight, so to speak. When that happens, a relatively small group can have a disproportionate influence on an issue. It doesn’t matter if it is the AARP or AIPAC. > [@brazil84](#): > > Why do you think Sarah Palin kept an Israeli flag in her office in Juneau long before she was picked as a VP candidate? Do you think AIPAC got to her? “Got to” implies a conspiracy that simply doesn’t exist. Does the AARP “get to” politicians? No, of course not. The bottom line is groups like AIPAC and AARP can deliver votes and money to a political candidate. Politicians recognize that, and do a simple cost benefit analysis. Supporting a lobby like AARP gets them votes and money. Opposing them doesn’t, and so most support them. As to why Palin has an Israeli flag in her office. It’s probably because she is a fundamentalist Christian, and as you note, there is broad support for Israel amongst fundamentalist Christians. > [@brazil84](#): > > The NRA is consistently ranked as powerful and influential, and yet gun control laws it opposes get put through now and then. They are powerful, but not all-powerful. The Israel lobby is the same way. First off, no one contends that AIPAC is all powerful. That is a made up straw man. There are a couple differences between AIPAC and the NRA, for example. The first is that AIPAC has broad based national support, whereas the NRA is more regional. It’s going to be very rare that a politician the NRA opposes is going to win an election in Texas or Louisiana. On the other hand, the NRA supporting a politician in NYC is likely going to be seen as a detriment instead of a bonus. It’s really only Republicans (and a few Democrats) that have to worry about the NRA. On the other hand, virtually every politician has to worry about AIPAC. The other difference is that there is a powerful lobby opposed to the NRA. The Brady campaign is a powerful lobby in it’s own right, and provides a bit of a counter balance to the NRA. There is no, as far as I am aware, lobby that works for the Palestinian side. Opposing the NRA gets you support from the Brady folks. What does opposing AIPAC get you? . ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/63 "2009-01-12T00:51:25Z")
> [@treis](#): > > First off, no one contends that AIPAC is all powerful. That is a made up straw man. I apologize if I misunderstood what’s been posted in this thread. It seemed you were arguing that if AIPAC wanted the US to move its embassy, then that’s what would happen. Essentially that AIPAC gets whatever it wants. If you agree that politicians can and do say “no” to AIPAC sometimes, then probably you don’t disagree with me, since I concede that AIPAC is a powerful lobby. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/64 "2009-01-12T01:28:32Z")
> [@treis](#): > > The bottom line is that AIPAC has gotten virtually every politician in the U.S. to support putting an embassy in Jerusalem. [QUOTE=treis] > [@brazil84](#): > > You seem to assume that laws are passed just because of lobbying groups. No, this is something you made up inside your head. [/quote] Pure comedy gold. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/65 "2009-01-12T02:09:29Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Pure comedy gold. Gotten, as in “recieved the support of”. It is clear from my other posts that I do not think that AIPAC is in control of U.S. policy. I do think that they are a very important part in setting it. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/66 "2009-01-12T02:19:43Z")
Front page of the AIPAC website today: [**Congress Declares Steadfast Support for Israel**](http://www.aipac.org/) and: [**Over a hundred American leaders have come out in support of Israel’s right to self-defense.**](http://www.aipac.org/) Meanwhile: [**UN Ceasefire Bid Weakened by US Abstention**](http://news.antiwar.com/2009/01/11/un-ceasefire-bid-weakened-by-us-abstention/) > [@](#): > > The United Nations Security Council’s bid to halt the ongoing war in the Gaza Strip with a non-binding resolution calling for a durable ceasefire never had much momentum behind it, but as French and British diplomats scrambled to get the deal together amid repeated American threats to veto it, the fact that America was heavily involved in the drafting and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was openly supporting it seemed to auger well for the latest attempt to stem the rising death toll. > > **The bill passed, 14-0, but more important than all 14 of the nations that voted yes was the one that didn’t vote at all**. **Secretary Rice, acting on orders from President Bush, abstained from voting, explaining that while the United States supported the text of the deal, they could not vote for it because of their “special relationship” with Israel**. – highlights mine. Hypocrisy courtesy of the United States…and AIPAC’s undue influence on American foreign policy. Yup a veritable laughathon – painted in gallons and gallons of Palestinian blood. ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/67 "2009-01-12T02:39:49Z")
I support Congress and the UN ambassador in that action. I don’t want the UN to force a ceasefire on Israel. Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/68 "2009-01-12T03:15:25Z")
[QUOTE=treis] Gotten, as in “recieved the support of”. [/QUOTE] Gotten as in “received the support of?” Treis 2, what do you have to say about Treis 1’s claim? > [@treis](#): > > AIPAC has gotten virtually every politician in the U.S. to support putting an embassy in Jerusalem. Oh, so gotten as in “gotten virtually every politician in the US” to do something. So Treis 2, you’re calling bullshit on Treis 1? Fascinating. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/69 "2009-01-12T03:30:32Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Gotten as in “received the support of?” Treis 2, what do you have to say about Treis 1’s claim? > > Oh, so gotten as in “gotten virtually every politician in the US” to do something. > > So Treis 2, you’re calling bullshit on Treis 1? > Fascinating. What in the world are you talking about. Look, it’s very simple. Take this statement: “Obama has gotten the support the majority of young people”. Does this statement mean (a) the majority of young people support Obama or (b) Obama controlled young people into voting for him. The meaning to me is clearly (a), but if you are still confused let me emphatically state that I meant (a). ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/70 "2009-01-12T04:04:45Z")
> [@treis](#): > > What in the world are you talking about. Look, it’s very simple. Take this statement: “Obama has gotten the support the majority of young people”. Actually, the analogous sentence would be the following: “Obama has gotten the majority of young people to vote for him.” And most people would understand that to mean that there was an element of persuasion on the part of Obama. Not only that, but the context of your original sentence makes it pretty clear that you meant what you now claim you did not mean. In short, you are weaseling. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/71 "2009-01-12T04:16:22Z")
I’m laughing so hard that I can hardly breathe at this point! [QUOTE=treis] What in the world are you talking about. Look, it’s very simple. Take this statement: “Obama has gotten the support the majority of young people”. Does this statement mean (a) the majority of young people support Obama or (b) Obama controlled young people into voting for him. The meaning to me is clearly (a), but if you are still confused let me emphatically state that I meant (a). [/QUOTE] You just can’t make this kind of stuff up. This is simply hilarious! And the real kicker is…you are entirely serious! -XT ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/72 "2009-01-12T04:17:31Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Actually, the analogous sentence would be the following: > > “Obama has gotten the majority of young people to vote for him.” > > And most people would understand that to mean that there was an element of persuasion on the part of Obama. That he needed to persuade every single young person? > [@brazil84](#): > > Not only that, but the context of your original sentence makes it pretty clear that you meant what you now claim you did not mean. > > In short, you are weaseling. Whatever. I know what I believe hasn’t changed in the last 4 hours. If my previous post was unclear, then I apologize. I never believed AIPAC controlled U.S. policy, nor did I mean to imply that I did. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/73 "2009-01-12T04:18:34Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > I’m laughing so hard that I can hardly breathe at this point! Well at least you aren’t accusing me of antisemitism. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/74 "2009-01-12T04:34:15Z")
Was that before or after you told me to fuck myself? I forget. 😛 -XT ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/75 "2009-01-12T04:41:30Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Was that before or after you told me to fuck myself? I forget. 😛 > > -XT After. I told you to go fuck yourself because you accused me of antisemitism. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/76 "2009-01-12T05:08:56Z")
Did I? Interesting. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/77 "2009-01-12T05:22:32Z")
**treis** , I have no idea what you’re arguing. You seem to be saying at one point that AIPAC is exerting undue influence over politicians through money. Then you go back and say that it’s not AIPAC controlling the politicians, they politicians just willingly support AIPAC in the same way (according to you) an Obama supporter likes Obama. If that is the case, then what exactly is AIPAC doing that you don’t like? In other words, what is your point? Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/78 "2009-01-12T05:40:52Z")
> [@treis](#): > > It’s clear that moving the embassy has broad support amongst political leaders in the U.S. The question is why hasn’t it happened yet, and, like I said, I’m guessing it is because Israel doesn’t want it to happen. I’m guessing it’s because the US doesn’t want to piss off the Arab states. As to the Israeli attitude, I did find the following cabinet communique from 1980, after the UN censured Israel for annexing East Jerusalem (bolding mine). > [@](#): > > At the weekly cabinet meeting: > > a) The Government of Israel rejects and condemns the United Nations Security Council resolution of Wednesday, 20 August, on Jerusalem, a decision made possible by the abstention of the representative of the United States. > > This was a surrender to the pressure of oil blackmail. > > **We regret that friendly countries have decided to transfer their embassies from Jerusalem to the coastal plain. We regret the amazing vote of the United States, which came in the wake of the speech of the Secretary of State. This vote, as already stated, made possible the passing of the resolution calling on several embassies to leave Jerusalem, while there are clear pledges in the United States to transfer the American embassy from the coast to Jerusalem.** > > The ancient people of Israel does not need the recognition of the Security Council, nor the agreement of its members, for Jerusalem to be the capital of the Jewish state. > > Jerusalem will continue to be, as it has been for over 3,000 years, Israel’s capital, one city, indivisible, the center of the life of the Jewish people. I also found this response, from 2006, at the news of Costa Rica moving its embassy from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv: > [@](#): > > “The Israeli government expresses its regret and disappointment at Costa Rica’s decision to move its embassy from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv,” a statement from Israel’s Foreign Ministry responded. “This step, with its current timing, can be interpreted as yielding to terror and rewarding its perpetrators. A united Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the nation of Israel and its state, and this [move by Costa Rica] will not change our firm stand on this issue.” It seems more likely that the US presidents are more willing to pay lip service to a Jerusalem embassy than actually do anything. That’s sort of the best of both worlds for the US. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/79 "2009-01-12T07:14:38Z")
> [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > However, if we are asking about unilateral support for all of Israel’s actions, regardless of what the Israeli government does and what it means to the US, its population, our tax dollars, the lives of our men and women in the armed services, our short and long-term standing in the court of world opinion, our national security, etc., I believe the numbers are much different. Before I throw out a number, I will try to provide a cite or two (fair is fair, after all!) As I already said: when you start getting down to brass tacks, the picture will look different. It always does, on every issue. But the OP was not asking why no politicians ever question anything Israel ever does. There ARE politicians that do question specific things Israel does, just as there are Americans that do question specific things Israel does. What politicians WON’T do is say that, in a general way, they do not support Israel, because there are very few Americans that would say so. > [@](#): > > I think you would agree (and I don’t have numbers yet to back this up), that many Americans believe that 9-11 would not have happened at all if the US government was not completely in lock-step with Israel. No, I do not agree. I also do not agree that US-Israeli relations can be called lockstep agreement. It would be a moment’s work to find a dozen issues on which we have disagreed. I also think the vast majority of Americans agree with me on both counts. The cites I’ve provided tend to support that claim. > [@](#): > > Would those airliners have been hijacked if we were not perceived by the arab world to be blindly supporting Israel? Yes, they would have. Islamic radicals have stated on many occasions what their goals and ambitions are, and why they oppose America. The Palestian issue is among those reasons, but it is far from the only one. Osama Bin Laden’s primary grieviences were the first gulf war, the enforcement of UN sanctions on Iraq, and the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 10:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604/80 "2009-01-12T10:57:06Z")
> [@treis](#): > > That he needed to persuade every single young person? No, of course not. > [@](#): > > Whatever. I know what I believe hasn’t changed in the last 4 hours. If my previous post was unclear, then I apologize. The post seemed clear enough to me. Anyway, I don’t see much of a debate on this point. AIPAC has a lot of influence. AIPAC doesn’t always get what it wants. The United States is rather pro-Israel in large part because there are a lot of Zionistic Jews and Christians here who feel pretty strongly on this issue. That’s the way democracy works, for better or for worse. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-support-of-israel-such-a-huge-requirement-for-american-politicians/480604.md?page=5)