Why The Hell Do Americans Care So Much About Israel?

[Shogun]

Let's have a list of peaceful, democratic Muslim countries....and a list of Muslim countries which haven't at some point had a leader make at least one sweeping condemnation of America, and voiced a desire to kill Christians.

Are you klidding me? Can you find the same thing here in THIS christian west? NAME it and i'll show you both the christian shit talking AND the desire to kill muslims.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

No. I think most Americans would gag on the power politics aspect of this. I think the popular wisdom is that people need to 'feel good' about something to support it. Rarely does the government find itself with the luxury of being able to satisfactorily explaining something to the American people based on its Real Politick merits and having them be comfortable with it.

I think most Americans individually support Israel (for those who do), for any number of reasons they have become comfortable with over time.
- Evangelicals are a big part of that. I think they fall under what Shogun was talking about.
- The Holocaust issue is another one.
- An underdog theory (useful if you forget Israel has 300 nukes). Little Israel against all the Arabs.

Plus, I think people here are ambivalent about the plight of the palis. Not that they have anything against them, they just don't care. They were on the losing side of the conflict. Tough. I think that's pretty much the sentiment. Think about it, nowhere else do you have a situation where one side lost and they left to stay in permanent refugee status. Eventually most refugees are absorbed into different societies, not here.

I also think that if Americans really start looking at the Palestinian issue, they quickly get the idea that if the rich Arab countries were so concerned about the Palestinians, they could have resolved their plight by collective action and created a state from them out of their lands. But no. They leave them in crowed refugee camps. Strange way to treat your Islamic brothers who are in need.

Agreed on the first point- To convince people to support virtually an infinite Marshall Plan to Israel in order to control the energy resources, it might've become harder and harder to stomach, at least for larger segments than we see today. Those other reasons you listed may well be why many parts of the Public support massive aid to Israel, although anyone who reads would be able to know that the real underdog here is not Israel [as you aid, unless you conveniently ignore not only 300 nukes, but the strongest military and highest GDP per capita in the region, among other indicators]- their mistake here would be to see this as a conflict between all Arabs and Israel. The real conflict here is between Israel and the Palestinians, and the Palestinians are absolutely undoubtedly the 'underdog', if you want to call it that.

The second points I can also agree with- most Americans, or even hell, most people in the world outside of West Asia, don't really care or particularly know much about the conflict at all- even activists I've met from both sides lack many of the details: how is the population outside those circles supposed to know? The ambivalence is what keeps this issue unresolved.

Furthermore, I don't think Americans or anyone who took a hard look at the issue [generally speaking] would arrive at the conclusion of "Why don't Arab countries give them money and land?", and it's for the following reasons:

Rich [and not so rich] arab countries do in fact give a lot of money to Palestine. For example, as response to the latest spat of violence last December/January, Algeria donated $200m, Turkey $63m UAE $90m, Kuwait $534m, Saudi Arabia $1 billion, Qatar $1.14 billion, to name some of the largest donors. (2008-2009 Gaza Strip aid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). That is not to say - in ANY way - that they are doing it out of the great generosity of their hearts- they do it to look good to their people, who more often than not are outraged by going-ons in Palestine, and who more often than not live under oppressive regimes whose only claim to legitimacy is their "Islamic-ness".

But that is not even it, because it is still looking at it as though the way to go about this is with Arabs vs. Jews, when it is not. This is a conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. When civil war was ravaging Central America, who would've thought that the way to solve it was for Brazil or Argentina or Chile to start donating money to the governments of the place? What difference does that make? These conflicts are not resolved with money. And land? I mean, to say that the Arabs have to give a piece of their land to the Palestinians is no different than saying that the Europeans and Americans should've been the ones to give a state to the Jews in their own land- Afterall, are they not THE richest ones of all? If the Western powers are so concerned for the Jews [which they should be, after all it was GERMANY and not any Arab nation that conducted the Holocaust], would it not have been fair, with the gigantic enormity of their resources to make a state for Jews from THEIR states?

How could one possible say that the Arabs should act collectively to offer the Palestinians SOME OTHER piece of land, but not say that Western powers should act collectively to offer the Israelis SOME OTHER piece of land? 0_o That doesn't make any sense. This conflict is about THIS land, because this is where both people claim their home to be. You can't just move the Palestinians to some random piece of desert somewhere else in the Arab world any more than you can't just move all Israelis to some random piece of terrain in Upstate New York or Bavaria [any more].

No, I think most people realize, as the international consensus states is that there are two people, and they both want a piece of THIS cake, and they're just going to have to split this cake in two, and they both have to just accept the fact and start acting like good neighbors. The Palestinians [or arabs] will NEVER push Israel to the sea- they must give that up, but I am ever more confident that they are realizing that. And the Israelis will never have the entirety of historical Palestine, because others live there- Palestinians live there, in the West Bank and Gaza. They must give that up- if not, they are doomed to complete the circle and "Do Unto Others". The price for that land is Genocide, and the sooner they realize that, the better.

 

[Tech_Esq]

No. I think most Americans would gag on the power politics aspect of this. I think the popular wisdom is that people need to 'feel good' about something to support it. Rarely does the government find itself with the luxury of being able to satisfactorily explaining something to the American people based on its Real Politick merits and having them be comfortable with it.

I think most Americans individually support Israel (for those who do), for any number of reasons they have become comfortable with over time.
- Evangelicals are a big part of that. I think they fall under what Shogun was talking about.
- The Holocaust issue is another one.
- An underdog theory (useful if you forget Israel has 300 nukes). Little Israel against all the Arabs.

Plus, I think people here are ambivalent about the plight of the palis. Not that they have anything against them, they just don't care. They were on the losing side of the conflict. Tough. I think that's pretty much the sentiment. Think about it, nowhere else do you have a situation where one side lost and they left to stay in permanent refugee status. Eventually most refugees are absorbed into different societies, not here.

I also think that if Americans really start looking at the Palestinian issue, they quickly get the idea that if the rich Arab countries were so concerned about the Palestinians, they could have resolved their plight by collective action and created a state from them out of their lands. But no. They leave them in crowed refugee camps. Strange way to treat your Islamic brothers who are in need.

Agreed on the first point- To convince people to support virtually an infinite Marshall Plan to Israel in order to control the energy resources, it might've become harder and harder to stomach, at least for larger segments than we see today. Those other reasons you listed may well be why many parts of the Public support massive aid to Israel, although anyone who reads would be able to know that the real underdog here is not Israel [as you aid, unless you conveniently ignore not only 300 nukes, but the strongest military and highest GDP per capita in the region, among other indicators]- their mistake here would be to see this as a conflict between all Arabs and Israel. The real conflict here is between Israel and the Palestinians, and the Palestinians are absolutely undoubtedly the 'underdog', if you want to call it that.

The second points I can also agree with- most Americans, or even hell, most people in the world outside of West Asia, don't really care or particularly know much about the conflict at all- even activists I've met from both sides lack many of the details: how is the population outside those circles supposed to know? The ambivalence is what keeps this issue unresolved.

Furthermore, I don't think Americans or anyone who took a hard look at the issue [generally speaking] would arrive at the conclusion of "Why don't Arab countries give them money and land?", and it's for the following reasons:

Rich [and not so rich] arab countries do in fact give a lot of money to Palestine. For example, as response to the latest spat of violence last December/January, Algeria donated $200m, Turkey $63m UAE $90m, Kuwait $534m, Saudi Arabia $1 billion, Qatar $1.14 billion, to name some of the largest donors. (2008-2009 Gaza Strip aid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). That is not to say - in ANY way - that they are doing it out of the great generosity of their hearts- they do it to look good to their people, who more often than not are outraged by going-ons in Palestine, and who more often than not live under oppressive regimes whose only claim to legitimacy is their "Islamic-ness".

But that is not even it, because it is still looking at it as though the way to go about this is with Arabs vs. Jews, when it is not. This is a conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. When civil war was ravaging Central America, who would've thought that the way to solve it was for Brazil or Argentina or Chile to start donating money to the governments of the place? What difference does that make? These conflicts are not resolved with money. And land? I mean, to say that the Arabs have to give a piece of their land to the Palestinians is no different than saying that the Europeans and Americans should've been the ones to give a state to the Jews in their own land- Afterall, are they not THE richest ones of all? If the Western powers are so concerned for the Jews [which they should be, after all it was GERMANY and not any Arab nation that conducted the Holocaust], would it not have been fair, with the gigantic enormity of their resources to make a state for Jews from THEIR states?

How could one possible say that the Arabs should act collectively to offer the Palestinians SOME OTHER piece of land, but not say that Western powers should act collectively to offer the Israelis SOME OTHER piece of land? 0_o That doesn't make any sense. This conflict is about THIS land, because this is where both people claim their home to be. You can't just move the Palestinians to some random piece of desert somewhere else in the Arab world any more than you can't just move all Israelis to some random piece of terrain in Upstate New York or Bavaria [any more].

No, I think most people realize, as the international consensus states is that there are two people, and they both want a piece of THIS cake, and they're just going to have to split this cake in two, and they both have to just accept the fact and start acting like good neighbors. The Palestinians [or arabs] will NEVER push Israel to the sea- they must give that up, but I am ever more confident that they are realizing that. And the Israelis will never have the entirety of historical Palestine, because others live there- Palestinians live there, in the West Bank and Gaza. They must give that up- if not, they are doomed to complete the circle and "Do Unto Others". The price for that land is Genocide, and the sooner they realize that, the better.

I think your last is a fairly accurate statement of the facts as they exist currently. My point, that I didn't make very well, was that since the one of the five pillars of Islam is to give alms to the poor, would it not be in the interests of all parties to consider this a sort of national alms? Instead, the Palestinians sit in the desert decade after decade for over 60 years.

I was listening to a Palestinian activist a year or two ago. He was talking to a audience at Georgetown University. His point was that the world must confront Israel and make it disarm and fall in line with other nations. He went on to give a very extensive recitation of the Israeli nuclear arms program from the 1950s to the present ending with an estimate that Israel has the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world after the US and Russia.

Contrary to his desire, what I came away with is that the Arabs need to understand that they have a mini-superpower in their neck of the woods and they need to learn how to deal with that fact. The reason I say that is that we don't confront nuclear powers in this world. That does not happen. You don't see us confronting North Korea, right? Nope....to late, they got the bomb. Back to Real Politick.

So, in the end, I don't see how the Palestinians will ever get what they desire. I used to believe in the two state solution, but I really have lost all hope in that as a workable solution.

 

[AllieBaba]

Let's have a list of peaceful, democratic Muslim countries....and a list of Muslim countries which haven't at some point had a leader make at least one sweeping condemnation of America, and voiced a desire to kill Christians.

Are you klidding me? Can you find the same thing here in THIS christian west? NAME it and i'll show you both the christian shit talking AND the desire to kill muslims.

Go ahead and post links to Western leaders saying they're going to seek out Muslims wherever they are hiding and kill them.

 

[AllieBaba]

And remember, as all Muslim apologists continue to remind us...Muslim is NOT synonomous with terrorist.

I'll wait.

 

[Shogun]

Let's have a list of peaceful, democratic Muslim countries....and a list of Muslim countries which haven't at some point had a leader make at least one sweeping condemnation of America, and voiced a desire to kill Christians.

Are you klidding me? Can you find the same thing here in THIS christian west? NAME it and i'll show you both the christian shit talking AND the desire to kill muslims.

Go ahead and post links to Western leaders saying they're going to seek out Muslims wherever they are hiding and kill them.

That wasn't your criteria at all. Moving the goal post is fun, isnt it? Maybe you can quote every muslim on the planet suggesting anything similar.

Again, how many Muslim nations can you name that has invaded a christian nation about bullshit WMDs within the last 20 fucking years? It's fun to watch you dance between your generalized hatred of muslims and your christian self righteousness. But, it's pretty sad too.

 

[Shogun]

And remember, as all Muslim apologists continue to remind us...Muslim is NOT synonomous with terrorist.

I'll wait.

Indeed.. no more than ABORTION CLINIC ASSASSINS are synonymous with christians, RIGHT?


RIGHT?


funny how your selective generalization works these days, eh?

 

[AllieBaba]

Let's talk some more about moving goal posts, lol.

No list, I take it.

 

[Shogun]

according to which criteria? your first statement or your second, shifted criteria?

 

[AllieBaba]

This is what you do when you can't cough up the evidence to support your idiocy.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Shogun]

This is what you do when you can't cough up the evidence to support your idiocy.

Thanks for playing.

Like I said, you moved your criteria according to my challenge.


Let's have a list of peaceful, democratic Muslim countries....and a list of Muslim countries which haven't at some point had a leader make at least one sweeping condemnation of America, and voiced a desire to kill Christians.

sure isn't even REMOTELY the same as


Go ahead and post links to Western leaders saying they're going to seek out Muslims wherever they are hiding and kill them.


tell me more about which of us is dancing around their fucked up post, baba. After all, we see how many wars Morocco has initiated against christian nations, dont' we. Don't let that keep you from ignoring how your kind call for the mass extermination of muslims though.. In your own words, "some tings are worth killing for", eh?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

This is what you do when you can't cough up the evidence to support your idiocy.

Thanks for playing.

Plain and simple, Allie: you embody the backward, ignorant, faithcentric, obsolete, cultural-anchor that has come to represent what it means to not be educated or well-read to the educated classes and why our society can't move forward using reason and knowledge as its propellant. You think Christians can do no wrong but that all Muslims are murderous terrorists without realizing that there is very little difference between the two faiths other than the details in your holy books. You think all you need to know you can learn from your Bible and you feel far more than you think, which you never do analytically or for very long. You are far outclassed in understanding and in being informed about this issue, nor have you given it much thought beyond your emotional reaction, and you should just shut your mouth, open your mind, and try to listen and learn something if you can see through your thick and tangled net of preconceived notions.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Why does AllieBaba want a list of "peaceful, democratic Muslim countries"? How exactly are you defininf peaceful and democratic? I mean, are "peace" and "democracy" your criteria for deciding whether one group is better than Another? Is this what it is about? Because, I mean, there are many "peaceful, democratic" western countries- though, sadly, neither the US nor Israel would be in a category that includes "peaceful". Just go look at the New Zealand thread. You guys landed #83. Hahahaha!! "Peaceful," what a load of hypocritic bullshit. One country has been actively occupying territory outside its legally recognized boundaries for 42 years, and the other initiated 2 major wars in the past 10 years ALONE, averages a major War pretty much every 20 years since it's very beginning, and YOU have the nerve to come around talking about "Peaceful" countries. What a joke.

And DEMOCRACY? Please AllieBaba, the US may be a democracy, but can you please tell us what that establishes in this discussion at all? Do you have a problem with dictatorships? It wouldn't seem like it: Your state has been in the business of funding and arming brutal authoritarian regimes for decades. Did you give a shit then? Or does it only matter when it's Muslim countries? The same story as always: democracy is important- BUT ONLY WHEN IT IS CONVENIENT FOR US. Even then there are democratic countries in the Muslim world, for example Turkey, Bangladesh, and Indonesia- which is an interesting example, because it was only allowed to become a democracy after the great US-backed/funded/armed Suharto finally died off. And it may come as a shock to you, but Iran was a democracy until 1953, when your government and the British decided to install an absolute dictator to keep control of the oil, a direct cause of the '79 revolution. Lebanon is another democracy, which used to be much more democratic but years of civil war and Israeli brutality and aggression has become increasingly authoritarian. And what could be said of some of the most brutal regimes in the area, like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which YOUR GOVERNMENT supports and arms- because of the obvious "Democracy is good for us, but not good for you." And then it is a big laugh for the reactionaries like you, who then point the finger and say "they're not democracies!"

 

[AllieBaba]

So what you losers are saying is there are no peaceful, democratic Muslim countries.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

So what you losers are saying is there are no peaceful, democratic Muslim countries.

Wow. What blind ignorance to which you desperately cling. Way to substantiate the liberal perception of religious conservatism!

 

[Epsilon Delta]

No, what we're saying is that you're an idiot who refuses to establish criteria for what you ask.

Muslim Majority Countries which are Democratic:

- Turkey
- Indonesia
- Bangladesh
- Mali
- Senegal

Muslim Majority Countries which are nominally democratic:

- Iran
- Nigeria
- Malaysia

Constitutional Monarchies with more-or-less freely elected parliaments:

- Morocco
- Kuwait

As for "peaceful", yeah, well peaceful by US standards? [War every few years?]. Er, I guess they would be relatively peaceful, except the wars are usually fought on home soil, while the US goes to make War in other latitudes, because it can.

So what? What does this show, Baba?

 

[Yukon]

Muslim countries of the middle-east are as peaceful as the Zionist country of the middle-east. No difference at all.

 

[AllieBaba]

Of course you're joking.

Lol. Do you have any idea how foolish you look?

 

[aliboy]

Epsilon Delta, rip off Noam Chomsky some more you fool! I am new to this board and have been scoping it out a bit and you are such a rip-off Epsilon, no doubt. I've noticed several posts in which you plagiarize him word for word. Shitty for a first post, but I can't stand to see someone pawn off left-wing garbage (Noam Chomsky is an idiot by the way) as if its his own. Terrible.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I can't figure this out. Someone told me it was because of religion. The predominant religion of the US, Christianity, believes that before the rapture the anti-Christ will come to power. But then...crap, I can't remember now, anyway, it had something to do with the Jews and Christians get together and triumph over the anti-Christ? Is that right?

So why is it so important that the POTUS kowtows to Israel? I say, screw Israel! Let'em take care of themselves. I don't like what they've been doing to Palestinians and I don't like how Arabs in Israel are officially 2nd class citizens. Anti-Arab sentiment (aka racism) is rampant among Israelis, I read somewhere that is was more than 70% of Israelis feel that Arabs are treated fairly in Israel although they have no vote and no right to hold office.

Half our problems in the Middle East would disappear if we stopped supporting Israel. So why don't we? It would be a lot better for National Security.

What do you think?

First off, we HAD nothing to do with the formation, arming or first war Israel fought, so much for that choice. In fact we almost did not recognize them at all.

We support Israel cause it is the RIGHT thing to do. Well until Obama tries to cut that.