Not just entitlements, any spending. If you got your check from FEMA and are able to rebuild, I would bet you would be for FEMA. Getting rid of waste, no problem. Old programs that slip through the Omnibus, yes definitely. You want to get out of welfare, than it needs to be a policy decision and phased out, you can't just stop on Jan 21st. We talk of mismanagement that got us here, how about some management to get out. Just stopping is not management.ATL Bear said:That's what every politician who has ever argued for an increase in entitlement spending, or new welfare program, or jobs bill has said. Then the reality of government mismanagement takes hold. It's truly remarkable you'd even make that argument.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?KaiBear said:whiterock said:For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.KaiBear said:whiterock said:Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.KaiBear said:whiterock said:......in the process killing millions of Jews and empowering Hizballah & Hamas which of course have killed thousands of Americans over the decades and still hold US hostages, leaving a pro-Russian/pro-Iranian regime in place to threaten a Nato ally (Turkey).KaiBear said:whiterock said:if you can't see what Israel has done for us in the last 12 months, I can't help you. Biggest bang for the buck, ever.Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Israel just utterly destroyed two Iranian proxies which have killed thousands of Amcits and currently hold several hostage. That campaign also denied the Syrian regime of an ally it depended upon to defend the line of advance into Damascus, causing the fall of the Assad regime, an Iranian ally who has been on the State Sponsor of Terrorism...The_barBEARian said:When is Israel going to pay back the trillion dollars the American tax payer has given them? We sure could use the money with our historic debt-to-GDP.sombear said:Realitybites said:
Link to Interview
It is a given that most people haven't heard of the USS Liberty. It's something that is generally glossed over in history classes, if it is taught at all. Or at least it used to be that way.
The official explanation is it was a case of mistaken identity that led to the death of 34 American servicemen in an attack that lasted far longer - and with multiple waves - than a case of mistaken identity would allow for.
Friendly fire happens. Pat Tillman was the most recent well known case of this. The USS Liberty attack was absolutely not a case of friendly fire.
Go watch the video, and remember the casualties on that ship next time someone starts advocating for war in Ukraine, Syria, Iran, or elsewhere.
Most people haven't heard of it? It was covered in my rural Indiana high school and again in college.
It remains unclear exactly what happened and why.
But let's say the absolute worst is true. Why should that affect foreign policy 57 years later? We are strong allies with a number of former enemies.
Allies pay back their debts.
Enemies do not.
Sure...100% correct
But don't act like they did it for America
Israel acts to the benefit of Israel only.....
Pre-1980 Iran was a very reliable proxy like Israel, too. A Shiite country surrounded by antagonistic Sunni countries, as well as a contiguous border with the USSR. Made them a very motivated ally. That is why Obama and Biden courted them so hard, foolishly hard. They wanted to flip them over to our side. And it was profoundly stupid, as the current regime is ideologically rooted in hatred of the West in general and USA in particular. As we have seen, no amount of inducements moved them an inch toward us and a lot more than that in the wrong direction.
.
I can certainly see why having Iran as pro-American ally would be very beneficial (big country, lots of oil, strategic location)
Still not sure what Israel it's us in the region that we already do not have.
But that is an interesting point about Obama-Biden still trying to pull Iran into the American orbit….though that seems like a lost cause given Irans current rulers
Interesting perspective.
Honestly think it's the other way around.
Without US financial support and military assets in the region……it's highly unlikely the rest of the Muslin world world have sat back while Israel invaded Gaza, Lebanon and Syria.
Killing thousands in the process.
How exactly is that preferrable to US interests than what has happened?
-total destruction of Hamas
-near total destruction of Hizballah
-fall of a major terror-sponsor regime in Damascus
-total collapse of decades of Iranian policy aimed at undermining US power around the world
-effective collapse of decades of Palestinian destabilization of the region.
Preferable to US intersects is to let Israel fight their own wars and finance their own issues.
which is another way of saying "let the islamic world destroy Israel."
That is a policy option which has not one keystroke of benefit to the USA.
How many Israeli migrants would you be willing to host? All 10m of them?
70 years of US involvement is more than enough.
It's been highly effective, arguably more so dollar for dollar, than any other ally relationship.
Focus on the needs of Americans right here at home.
70 years is enough period.
And you and I both know it's only gone on this long due to intense lobbying of our government officials.
And no, it is quite silly to suggest that our alliance with Israel is solely due to Jewish lobby money. The needs/benefits are quite obvious, no matter how hard you try not to see them.
Aid to Israel is less than 1% of the budget deficit, buddy...... And for that expense we got total destruction of Hamas & Hizballah, without a single drop of American soldier sweat.
I do believe you'd hack off your foot to save 50% on the cost trimming your toenails.
Stupid post.
We have spent billions of dollars on Israel annually for decades.
It's only done at this point due to millions of dollars given to our political operatives by Israeli lobbyists.
70 years worth…..take a moment and really let that sink in.
Time to focus on our own problems ; our own people.
Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important
Netanyahu said "we are at war,"
498,351 Views |
6830 Replies |
Last: 3 hrs ago by whiterock
We've had it multiple times and it gets into bizarre ethnic-historical-cultural alignment perceptions, not actual realpolitik. We know why Israel is outside the circle even if you won't admit it.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:Suspect all you want and twist what I said all you want. Reality is we aren't arguing about aid to South Korea or Egypt, it's Israel, as it always seems to be. That's not by coincidence.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:I literally said in the post you responded to, if you want to save the money, that's a legitimate argument. You just failed to either read or include that in your reply. I'm fine with cutting. Not this emotional appeal argument over "why are we spending in Israel and not Americans?".Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:I'm willing to pay for the defense of this country and have the understanding that jobs are actually created within the military and supporting industries, all be it hamstrung with similar inefficiencies.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:That's what every politician who has ever argued for an increase in entitlement spending, or new welfare program, or jobs bill has said. Then the reality of government mismanagement takes hold. It's truly remarkable you'd even make that argument.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?KaiBear said:whiterock said:For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.KaiBear said:whiterock said:Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.KaiBear said:whiterock said:......in the process killing millions of Jews and empowering Hizballah & Hamas which of course have killed thousands of Americans over the decades and still hold US hostages, leaving a pro-Russian/pro-Iranian regime in place to threaten a Nato ally (Turkey).KaiBear said:whiterock said:if you can't see what Israel has done for us in the last 12 months, I can't help you. Biggest bang for the buck, ever.Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Israel just utterly destroyed two Iranian proxies which have killed thousands of Amcits and currently hold several hostage. That campaign also denied the Syrian regime of an ally it depended upon to defend the line of advance into Damascus, causing the fall of the Assad regime, an Iranian ally who has been on the State Sponsor of Terrorism...The_barBEARian said:When is Israel going to pay back the trillion dollars the American tax payer has given them? We sure could use the money with our historic debt-to-GDP.sombear said:Realitybites said:
Link to Interview
It is a given that most people haven't heard of the USS Liberty. It's something that is generally glossed over in history classes, if it is taught at all. Or at least it used to be that way.
The official explanation is it was a case of mistaken identity that led to the death of 34 American servicemen in an attack that lasted far longer - and with multiple waves - than a case of mistaken identity would allow for.
Friendly fire happens. Pat Tillman was the most recent well known case of this. The USS Liberty attack was absolutely not a case of friendly fire.
Go watch the video, and remember the casualties on that ship next time someone starts advocating for war in Ukraine, Syria, Iran, or elsewhere.
Most people haven't heard of it? It was covered in my rural Indiana high school and again in college.
It remains unclear exactly what happened and why.
But let's say the absolute worst is true. Why should that affect foreign policy 57 years later? We are strong allies with a number of former enemies.
Allies pay back their debts.
Enemies do not.
Sure...100% correct
But don't act like they did it for America
Israel acts to the benefit of Israel only.....
Pre-1980 Iran was a very reliable proxy like Israel, too. A Shiite country surrounded by antagonistic Sunni countries, as well as a contiguous border with the USSR. Made them a very motivated ally. That is why Obama and Biden courted them so hard, foolishly hard. They wanted to flip them over to our side. And it was profoundly stupid, as the current regime is ideologically rooted in hatred of the West in general and USA in particular. As we have seen, no amount of inducements moved them an inch toward us and a lot more than that in the wrong direction.
.
I can certainly see why having Iran as pro-American ally would be very beneficial (big country, lots of oil, strategic location)
Still not sure what Israel it's us in the region that we already do not have.
But that is an interesting point about Obama-Biden still trying to pull Iran into the American orbit….though that seems like a lost cause given Irans current rulers
Interesting perspective.
Honestly think it's the other way around.
Without US financial support and military assets in the region……it's highly unlikely the rest of the Muslin world world have sat back while Israel invaded Gaza, Lebanon and Syria.
Killing thousands in the process.
How exactly is that preferrable to US interests than what has happened?
-total destruction of Hamas
-near total destruction of Hizballah
-fall of a major terror-sponsor regime in Damascus
-total collapse of decades of Iranian policy aimed at undermining US power around the world
-effective collapse of decades of Palestinian destabilization of the region.
Preferable to US intersects is to let Israel fight their own wars and finance their own issues.
which is another way of saying "let the islamic world destroy Israel."
That is a policy option which has not one keystroke of benefit to the USA.
How many Israeli migrants would you be willing to host? All 10m of them?
70 years of US involvement is more than enough.
It's been highly effective, arguably more so dollar for dollar, than any other ally relationship.
Focus on the needs of Americans right here at home.
70 years is enough period.
And you and I both know it's only gone on this long due to intense lobbying of our government officials.
And no, it is quite silly to suggest that our alliance with Israel is solely due to Jewish lobby money. The needs/benefits are quite obvious, no matter how hard you try not to see them.
Aid to Israel is less than 1% of the budget deficit, buddy...... And for that expense we got total destruction of Hamas & Hizballah, without a single drop of American soldier sweat.
I do believe you'd hack off your foot to save 50% on the cost trimming your toenails.
Stupid post.
We have spent billions of dollars on Israel annually for decades.
It's only done at this point due to millions of dollars given to our political operatives by Israeli lobbyists.
70 years worth…..take a moment and really let that sink in.
Time to focus on our own problems ; our own people.
Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important
Its far more remarkable that you are making the argument that a few billion dollars of tax payer money is no big deal. (when it is)
And that it should be handed off to foreigners in another country. (insulting)
Have you personally sent money to Israel? Try doing that first before you advocate sending billions of tax payer money to them
You pretend to be a fiscal hawk.....but now you are ok with large amounts of government defense spending?
Fair enough....so your concerns about government spending are very hypocritical
(not to mention you can spend money on US defense without giving money to Israel....that is a logical fallacy)
Its more a rational political question...its interesting you think the question of why should American politicians spend money on Americans vs on foreigners is a "emotional question"
Its very reasonable to ask why its being done....what benefits it has for the American people....and given our debts levels if its unstainable (even if you think a few billion is no big deal)
In fact I suspect your attachment to sending billions in tax payer money to Israel is based more on emotion than it is on rational cost vs benefit analysis....or any concerns for actual American defense
I am happy to have those arguments and talk about which relationships are really necessary for our real security needs
(Speaking of Egypt you do realize a big reason we give them billions of dollars is so they keep the peace with Israel right?)
ATL Bear said:We've had it multiple times and it gets into bizarre ethnic-historical-cultural alignment perceptions, not actual realpolitik. We know why Israel is outside the circle even if you won't admit it.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:Suspect all you want and twist what I said all you want. Reality is we aren't arguing about aid to South Korea or Egypt, it's Israel, as it always seems to be. That's not by coincidence.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:I literally said in the post you responded to, if you want to save the money, that's a legitimate argument. You just failed to either read or include that in your reply. I'm fine with cutting. Not this emotional appeal argument over "why are we spending in Israel and not Americans?".Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:I'm willing to pay for the defense of this country and have the understanding that jobs are actually created within the military and supporting industries, all be it hamstrung with similar inefficiencies.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:That's what every politician who has ever argued for an increase in entitlement spending, or new welfare program, or jobs bill has said. Then the reality of government mismanagement takes hold. It's truly remarkable you'd even make that argument.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?KaiBear said:whiterock said:For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.KaiBear said:whiterock said:Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.KaiBear said:whiterock said:......in the process killing millions of Jews and empowering Hizballah & Hamas which of course have killed thousands of Americans over the decades and still hold US hostages, leaving a pro-Russian/pro-Iranian regime in place to threaten a Nato ally (Turkey).KaiBear said:whiterock said:if you can't see what Israel has done for us in the last 12 months, I can't help you. Biggest bang for the buck, ever.Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Israel just utterly destroyed two Iranian proxies which have killed thousands of Amcits and currently hold several hostage. That campaign also denied the Syrian regime of an ally it depended upon to defend the line of advance into Damascus, causing the fall of the Assad regime, an Iranian ally who has been on the State Sponsor of Terrorism...The_barBEARian said:When is Israel going to pay back the trillion dollars the American tax payer has given them? We sure could use the money with our historic debt-to-GDP.sombear said:Realitybites said:
Link to Interview
It is a given that most people haven't heard of the USS Liberty. It's something that is generally glossed over in history classes, if it is taught at all. Or at least it used to be that way.
The official explanation is it was a case of mistaken identity that led to the death of 34 American servicemen in an attack that lasted far longer - and with multiple waves - than a case of mistaken identity would allow for.
Friendly fire happens. Pat Tillman was the most recent well known case of this. The USS Liberty attack was absolutely not a case of friendly fire.
Go watch the video, and remember the casualties on that ship next time someone starts advocating for war in Ukraine, Syria, Iran, or elsewhere.
Most people haven't heard of it? It was covered in my rural Indiana high school and again in college.
It remains unclear exactly what happened and why.
But let's say the absolute worst is true. Why should that affect foreign policy 57 years later? We are strong allies with a number of former enemies.
Allies pay back their debts.
Enemies do not.
Sure...100% correct
But don't act like they did it for America
Israel acts to the benefit of Israel only.....
Pre-1980 Iran was a very reliable proxy like Israel, too. A Shiite country surrounded by antagonistic Sunni countries, as well as a contiguous border with the USSR. Made them a very motivated ally. That is why Obama and Biden courted them so hard, foolishly hard. They wanted to flip them over to our side. And it was profoundly stupid, as the current regime is ideologically rooted in hatred of the West in general and USA in particular. As we have seen, no amount of inducements moved them an inch toward us and a lot more than that in the wrong direction.
.
I can certainly see why having Iran as pro-American ally would be very beneficial (big country, lots of oil, strategic location)
Still not sure what Israel it's us in the region that we already do not have.
But that is an interesting point about Obama-Biden still trying to pull Iran into the American orbit….though that seems like a lost cause given Irans current rulers
Interesting perspective.
Honestly think it's the other way around.
Without US financial support and military assets in the region……it's highly unlikely the rest of the Muslin world world have sat back while Israel invaded Gaza, Lebanon and Syria.
Killing thousands in the process.
How exactly is that preferrable to US interests than what has happened?
-total destruction of Hamas
-near total destruction of Hizballah
-fall of a major terror-sponsor regime in Damascus
-total collapse of decades of Iranian policy aimed at undermining US power around the world
-effective collapse of decades of Palestinian destabilization of the region.
Preferable to US intersects is to let Israel fight their own wars and finance their own issues.
which is another way of saying "let the islamic world destroy Israel."
That is a policy option which has not one keystroke of benefit to the USA.
How many Israeli migrants would you be willing to host? All 10m of them?
70 years of US involvement is more than enough.
It's been highly effective, arguably more so dollar for dollar, than any other ally relationship.
Focus on the needs of Americans right here at home.
70 years is enough period.
And you and I both know it's only gone on this long due to intense lobbying of our government officials.
And no, it is quite silly to suggest that our alliance with Israel is solely due to Jewish lobby money. The needs/benefits are quite obvious, no matter how hard you try not to see them.
Aid to Israel is less than 1% of the budget deficit, buddy...... And for that expense we got total destruction of Hamas & Hizballah, without a single drop of American soldier sweat.
I do believe you'd hack off your foot to save 50% on the cost trimming your toenails.
Stupid post.
We have spent billions of dollars on Israel annually for decades.
It's only done at this point due to millions of dollars given to our political operatives by Israeli lobbyists.
70 years worth…..take a moment and really let that sink in.
Time to focus on our own problems ; our own people.
Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important
Its far more remarkable that you are making the argument that a few billion dollars of tax payer money is no big deal. (when it is)
And that it should be handed off to foreigners in another country. (insulting)
Have you personally sent money to Israel? Try doing that first before you advocate sending billions of tax payer money to them
You pretend to be a fiscal hawk.....but now you are ok with large amounts of government defense spending?
Fair enough....so your concerns about government spending are very hypocritical
(not to mention you can spend money on US defense without giving money to Israel....that is a logical fallacy)
Its more a rational political question...its interesting you think the question of why should American politicians spend money on Americans vs on foreigners is a "emotional question"
Its very reasonable to ask why its being done....what benefits it has for the American people....and given our debts levels if its unstainable (even if you think a few billion is no big deal)
In fact I suspect your attachment to sending billions in tax payer money to Israel is based more on emotion than it is on rational cost vs benefit analysis....or any concerns for actual American defense
I am happy to have those arguments and talk about which relationships are really necessary for our real security needs
(Speaking of Egypt you do realize a big reason we give them billions of dollars is so they keep the peace with Israel right?)
You would do better to psychoanalyze yourself and not others
Israel and others like Egypt deserve to be critiqued for living off billions from American tax payers
You do seem to irrationally lash out if you feel anyone is giving negative feed back about a foreign country that is not important to the lives or security of the American people.
Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:Suspect all you want and twist what I said all you want. Reality is we aren't arguing about aid to South Korea or Egypt, it's Israel, as it always seems to be. That's not by coincidence.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:I literally said in the post you responded to, if you want to save the money, that's a legitimate argument. You just failed to either read or include that in your reply. I'm fine with cutting. Not this emotional appeal argument over "why are we spending in Israel and not Americans?".Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:I'm willing to pay for the defense of this country and have the understanding that jobs are actually created within the military and supporting industries, all be it hamstrung with similar inefficiencies.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:That's what every politician who has ever argued for an increase in entitlement spending, or new welfare program, or jobs bill has said. Then the reality of government mismanagement takes hold. It's truly remarkable you'd even make that argument.Redbrickbear said:ATL Bear said:We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?KaiBear said:whiterock said:For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.KaiBear said:whiterock said:Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.KaiBear said:whiterock said:......in the process killing millions of Jews and empowering Hizballah & Hamas which of course have killed thousands of Americans over the decades and still hold US hostages, leaving a pro-Russian/pro-Iranian regime in place to threaten a Nato ally (Turkey).KaiBear said:whiterock said:if you can't see what Israel has done for us in the last 12 months, I can't help you. Biggest bang for the buck, ever.Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Israel just utterly destroyed two Iranian proxies which have killed thousands of Amcits and currently hold several hostage. That campaign also denied the Syrian regime of an ally it depended upon to defend the line of advance into Damascus, causing the fall of the Assad regime, an Iranian ally who has been on the State Sponsor of Terrorism...The_barBEARian said:When is Israel going to pay back the trillion dollars the American tax payer has given them? We sure could use the money with our historic debt-to-GDP.sombear said:Realitybites said:
Link to Interview
It is a given that most people haven't heard of the USS Liberty. It's something that is generally glossed over in history classes, if it is taught at all. Or at least it used to be that way.
The official explanation is it was a case of mistaken identity that led to the death of 34 American servicemen in an attack that lasted far longer - and with multiple waves - than a case of mistaken identity would allow for.
Friendly fire happens. Pat Tillman was the most recent well known case of this. The USS Liberty attack was absolutely not a case of friendly fire.
Go watch the video, and remember the casualties on that ship next time someone starts advocating for war in Ukraine, Syria, Iran, or elsewhere.
Most people haven't heard of it? It was covered in my rural Indiana high school and again in college.
It remains unclear exactly what happened and why.
But let's say the absolute worst is true. Why should that affect foreign policy 57 years later? We are strong allies with a number of former enemies.
Allies pay back their debts.
Enemies do not.
Sure...100% correct
But don't act like they did it for America
Israel acts to the benefit of Israel only.....
Pre-1980 Iran was a very reliable proxy like Israel, too. A Shiite country surrounded by antagonistic Sunni countries, as well as a contiguous border with the USSR. Made them a very motivated ally. That is why Obama and Biden courted them so hard, foolishly hard. They wanted to flip them over to our side. And it was profoundly stupid, as the current regime is ideologically rooted in hatred of the West in general and USA in particular. As we have seen, no amount of inducements moved them an inch toward us and a lot more than that in the wrong direction.
.
I can certainly see why having Iran as pro-American ally would be very beneficial (big country, lots of oil, strategic location)
Still not sure what Israel it's us in the region that we already do not have.
But that is an interesting point about Obama-Biden still trying to pull Iran into the American orbit….though that seems like a lost cause given Irans current rulers
Interesting perspective.
Honestly think it's the other way around.
Without US financial support and military assets in the region……it's highly unlikely the rest of the Muslin world world have sat back while Israel invaded Gaza, Lebanon and Syria.
Killing thousands in the process.
How exactly is that preferrable to US interests than what has happened?
-total destruction of Hamas
-near total destruction of Hizballah
-fall of a major terror-sponsor regime in Damascus
-total collapse of decades of Iranian policy aimed at undermining US power around the world
-effective collapse of decades of Palestinian destabilization of the region.
Preferable to US intersects is to let Israel fight their own wars and finance their own issues.
which is another way of saying "let the islamic world destroy Israel."
That is a policy option which has not one keystroke of benefit to the USA.
How many Israeli migrants would you be willing to host? All 10m of them?
70 years of US involvement is more than enough.
It's been highly effective, arguably more so dollar for dollar, than any other ally relationship.
Focus on the needs of Americans right here at home.
70 years is enough period.
And you and I both know it's only gone on this long due to intense lobbying of our government officials.
And no, it is quite silly to suggest that our alliance with Israel is solely due to Jewish lobby money. The needs/benefits are quite obvious, no matter how hard you try not to see them.
Aid to Israel is less than 1% of the budget deficit, buddy...... And for that expense we got total destruction of Hamas & Hizballah, without a single drop of American soldier sweat.
I do believe you'd hack off your foot to save 50% on the cost trimming your toenails.
Stupid post.
We have spent billions of dollars on Israel annually for decades.
It's only done at this point due to millions of dollars given to our political operatives by Israeli lobbyists.
70 years worth…..take a moment and really let that sink in.
Time to focus on our own problems ; our own people.
Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important
Its far more remarkable that you are making the argument that a few billion dollars of tax payer money is no big deal. (when it is)
And that it should be handed off to foreigners in another country. (insulting)
Have you personally sent money to Israel? Try doing that first before you advocate sending billions of tax payer money to them
You pretend to be a fiscal hawk.....but now you are ok with large amounts of government defense spending?
Fair enough....so your concerns about government spending are very hypocritical
(not to mention you can spend money on US defense without giving money to Israel....that is a logical fallacy)
Its more a rational political question...its interesting you think the question of why should American politicians spend money on Americans vs on foreigners is a "emotional question"
Its very reasonable to ask why its being done....what benefits it has for the American people....and given our debts levels if its unstainable (even if you think a few billion is no big deal)
In fact I suspect your attachment to sending billions in tax payer money to Israel is based more on emotion than it is on rational cost vs benefit analysis....or any concerns for actual American defense
I am happy to have those arguments and talk about which relationships are really necessary for our real security needs
(Speaking of Egypt you do realize a big reason we give them billions of dollars is so they keep the peace with Israel right?)
Hardly
That is a factual statement
Part of the reason Egypt gets $2 billion plus a from us is to keep the peace treaty with Israel
For work purposes, I'm very familiar with U.S/Egypt relations. Israel is near or at the bottom on the list of reasons these days. Egypt wants peace with Israel and has since more moderate voices took over. Egypt is the power player in the ME/Africa. We've mostly paid them for economic and trade reasons and to keep them out of bed with Russia and China. It is also important for anti-terror purposes. The $1 billion + we pay Egypt is about as good an investment a country can make. Egypt has long provided invaluable terror/defense intel., and we help with their internal radicalism issues. That alone is worth the investment. Add to that Egypt's regional influence and the canal. I'd say it's one of our best and most underrated international investments with positive ramifications that go far beyond ME/Africa.
what's stupid is watching Israel over and over do battle with powers hostile to us, degrading their power, and most recently utterly destroying proxy armies which have killed THOUSANDS of Americans over the years, and saying that we got no benefit from it.KaiBear said:whiterock said:For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.KaiBear said:whiterock said:Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.KaiBear said:whiterock said:......in the process killing millions of Jews and empowering Hizballah & Hamas which of course have killed thousands of Americans over the decades and still hold US hostages, leaving a pro-Russian/pro-Iranian regime in place to threaten a Nato ally (Turkey).KaiBear said:whiterock said:
if you can't see what Israel has done for us in the last 12 months, I can't help you. Biggest bang for the buck, ever.
Interesting perspective.
Honestly think it's the other way around.
Without US financial support and military assets in the region……it's highly unlikely the rest of the Muslin world world have sat back while Israel invaded Gaza, Lebanon and Syria.
Killing thousands in the process.
How exactly is that preferrable to US interests than what has happened?
-total destruction of Hamas
-near total destruction of Hizballah
-fall of a major terror-sponsor regime in Damascus
-total collapse of decades of Iranian policy aimed at undermining US power around the world
-effective collapse of decades of Palestinian destabilization of the region.
Preferable to US intersects is to let Israel fight their own wars and finance their own issues.
which is another way of saying "let the islamic world destroy Israel."
That is a policy option which has not one keystroke of benefit to the USA.
How many Israeli migrants would you be willing to host? All 10m of them?
70 years of US involvement is more than enough.
It's been highly effective, arguably more so dollar for dollar, than any other ally relationship.
Focus on the needs of Americans right here at home.
70 years is enough period.
And you and I both know it's only gone on this long due to intense lobbying of our government officials.
And no, it is quite silly to suggest that our alliance with Israel is solely due to Jewish lobby money. The needs/benefits are quite obvious, no matter how hard you try not to see them.
Aid to Israel is less than 1% of the budget deficit, buddy...... And for that expense we got total destruction of Hamas & Hizballah, without a single drop of American soldier sweat.
I do believe you'd hack off your foot to save 50% on the cost trimming your toenails.
Stupid post.
We have spent billions of dollars on Israel annually for decades.
It's only done at this point due to millions of dollars given to our political operatives by Israeli lobbyists.
70 years worth…..take a moment and really let that sink in.
Time to focus on our own problems ; our own people.
Do you not know anything at all about Hizballah?
(google is your friend).
Israel has been keeping them bottled up for decades, and spectacularly destroyed the entire organization this year. Not one American soldier was a risk for any of that. And you say there is no value....
Harrumph is really bad policy, buddy.....
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-influential-is-aipacRedbrickbear said:whiterock said:1. For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.KaiBear said:whiterock said:Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.KaiBear said:whiterock said:......in the process killing millions of Jews and empowering Hizballah & Hamas which of course have killed thousands of Americans over the decades and still hold US hostages, leaving a pro-Russian/pro-Iranian regime in place to threaten a Nato ally (Turkey).KaiBear said:whiterock said:if you can't see what Israel has done for us in the last 12 months, I can't help you. Biggest bang for the buck, ever.Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:
Israel just utterly destroyed two Iranian proxies which have killed thousands of Amcits and currently hold several hostage. That campaign also denied the Syrian regime of an ally it depended upon to defend the line of advance into Damascus, causing the fall of the Assad regime, an Iranian ally who has been on the State Sponsor of Terrorism...
Sure...100% correct
But don't act like they did it for America
Israel acts to the benefit of Israel only.....
Pre-1980 Iran was a very reliable proxy like Israel, too. A Shiite country surrounded by antagonistic Sunni countries, as well as a contiguous border with the USSR. Made them a very motivated ally. That is why Obama and Biden courted them so hard, foolishly hard. They wanted to flip them over to our side. And it was profoundly stupid, as the current regime is ideologically rooted in hatred of the West in general and USA in particular. As we have seen, no amount of inducements moved them an inch toward us and a lot more than that in the wrong direction.
.
I can certainly see why having Iran as pro-American ally would be very beneficial (big country, lots of oil, strategic location)
Still not sure what Israel it's us in the region that we already do not have.
But that is an interesting point about Obama-Biden still trying to pull Iran into the American orbit….though that seems like a lost cause given Irans current rulers
Interesting perspective.
Honestly think it's the other way around.
Without US financial support and military assets in the region……it's highly unlikely the rest of the Muslin world world have sat back while Israel invaded Gaza, Lebanon and Syria.
Killing thousands in the process.
How exactly is that preferrable to US interests than what has happened?
-total destruction of Hamas
-near total destruction of Hizballah
-fall of a major terror-sponsor regime in Damascus
-total collapse of decades of Iranian policy aimed at undermining US power around the world
-effective collapse of decades of Palestinian destabilization of the region.
Preferable to US intersects is to let Israel fight their own wars and finance their own issues.
which is another way of saying "let the islamic world destroy Israel."
That is a policy option which has not one keystroke of benefit to the USA.
How many Israeli migrants would you be willing to host? All 10m of them?
70 years of US involvement is more than enough.
It's been highly effective, arguably more so dollar for dollar, than any other ally relationship.
Focus on the needs of Americans right here at home.
70 years is enough period.
And you and I both know it's only gone on this long due to intense lobbying of our government officials.
2. And no, it is quite silly to suggest that our alliance with Israel is solely due to Jewish lobby money. The needs/benefits are quite obvious, no matter how hard you try not to see them.
1. Debatable...but I am open to a hearing a debate between two people with knowledge of the subject matter talk about the pros and cons of the arraignment
I make no statement on personally knowing if it is or is not the best bang for our buck.
res ipsa loquitur. what other state has risked (and sacrificed) so many of its sons & daughters the way Israel has to destroy our common enemies? All we had to do was send ammo.
2. Jews are a major constituently of the Democratic party and Evangelicals are a major constituency of the Republican party
Two groups willing to pour a lot of money....and exert a lot of influence in DC to create a lot of head wing against anything other than a ultra pro-Israel policy in DC
But yes there is 100% a powerful Jewish lobby in DC among the Democrats and a powerful Evangelical lobby among the Republicans pushing our foreign policy in one direction
It's the evangelical base which more strongly supports the existence of Israel, and has orders of magnitude more voters than the Jewish base.
There is no more silly, easily refutable meme than the idea that Israeli money buys votes for legislation which would otherwise fail. AIPAC is Jewish Americans. And it is not a terribly important lobby, in terms of money. What makes the pro-Israel lobby powerful is not just that it spends money in Washington. The pro-Israel lobby is powerful because it represents the views of a majority of the American people, and because of the many, manifest benefits a strong relationship with Israel affords US national security interests.