ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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?)

---

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.

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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?)

---

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.

---

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.

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

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.

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.....

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

1. For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-influential-is-aipac

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.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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.

---

Excellent post, but you are letting facts mess up the narrative.

Poland confirms it will arrest Israeli PM Netanyahu if he attempts to visit the Auschwitz memorial this year.

Follow: @AFpost pic.twitter.com/ZSkhnc694D

— AF Post (@AFpost) December 24, 2024

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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..

---

I literally said from the get go it was not the only reason we pay Egypt

But yes…keeping the peace with Israel was and is one of the reasons we bribe them with American tax payer money

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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..

---

I literally said from the get go it was not the only reason we pay Egypt

But yes…keeping the peace with Israel was and is one of the reasons we bribe them with American tax payer money

---

Suez is a pretty big reason, but keep pushing the Israel thing. You have a narrative to push, we get it. US bad, Israel bad, got it.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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..

---

I literally said from the get go it was not the only reason we pay Egypt

But yes…keeping the peace with Israel was and is one of the reasons we bribe them with American tax payer money

---

I mean, if it's a reason at all

---

Well historically it was the main reason at the beginning

[In the case of Egypt, US aid granted since the signing of the 1978 Camp David Accords was "untouchable compensation" for maintaining peace with Israel. This deal is considered a cornerstone of US-Egyptian relations.

Robert Springborg, a Middle East expert and non-resident fellow at the Italian Institute of International Affairs, told…that US economic support was intended to stabilize Anwar Sadat's (former Egyptian president) government and succeeding ones.

How does the US benefit?

The primary benefit is the "cessation of hostilities against Israel" by Egypt and "other Arab states that could not wage war against Israel in the absence of Egyptian participation", Springborg said.]

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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..

---

I literally said from the get go it was not the only reason we pay Egypt

But yes…keeping the peace with Israel was and is one of the reasons we bribe them with American tax payer money

---

Suez is a pretty big reason, but keep pushing the Israel thing. You have a narrative to push, we get it. US bad, Israel bad, got it.

---

No narrative brother…just facts

1. Suez is super important (but was so long before we started paying bribe money to Egypt)

2. The U.S. is awesome!

3. Israel is….at best a welfare queen lol….a strategic liability at worst

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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?)

---

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.

---

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.

---

One doesn't need to be Freud to know you're an anti-Semite.

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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?)

---

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.

---

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.

---

One doesn't need to be Freud to know you're an anti-Semite.

---

Racism charge….the last refuge of a scoundrel who has lost the argument

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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..

---

I literally said from the get go it was not the only reason we pay Egypt

But yes…keeping the peace with Israel was and is one of the reasons we bribe them with American tax payer money

---

I mean, if it's a reason at all

---

Well historically it was the main reason at the beginning

[In the case of Egypt, US aid granted since the signing of the 1978 Camp David Accords was "untouchable compensation" for maintaining peace with Israel. This deal is considered a cornerstone of US-Egyptian relations.

Robert Springborg, a Middle East expert and non-resident fellow at the Italian Institute of International Affairs, told…that US economic support was intended to stabilize Anwar Sadat's (former Egyptian president) government and succeeding ones.

How does the US benefit?

The primary benefit is the "cessation of hostilities against Israel" by Egypt and "other Arab states that could not wage war against Israel in the absence of Egyptian participation", Springborg said.]

---

On this issue, you definitely have more studying to do.

I don't know where you got this, but if the conclusion was that buying Egypt's acceptance of Israel was the main reason for our support of Egypt in 1978, it is very much a distorted and narrow view of the thawing of U.S. - Egypt relations in the 1970s.

We had on and off strong relations with Egypt since its independence and that included providing them military and economic support back to the early 20th Century. Ironically, we limited support more based on Egypt's strengthening ties with Russia/China more than on Egypt's invasions of Israel.

As for the 1970s, there was so much going on at the time economically, politically, and militarily. And Sadat was a moderate unlike his predecessor. Again, he wanted peace with Israel and stronger ties with the U.S. its fledgling economy and political instability made it a necessity.

To say our support at the time was bribing him to make peace with Israel is absurd. We had just reestablished relations with Egypt. Our support resulted in the reopening of the canal and Egypt kicking the Soviets to the curb.

Would I be shocked if at some point in the Camp David talks Sadat asked us to sweeten the pot? No. But no objective person who understands the history can say Israel in a vacuum is why we supported Egypt in 1978. We had already supported Egypt, and our support in the late 20th Century got us so much more.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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..

---

I literally said from the get go it was not the only reason we pay Egypt

But yes…keeping the peace with Israel was and is one of the reasons we bribe them with American tax payer money

---

I mean, if it's a reason at all

---

Well historically it was the main reason at the beginning

[In the case of Egypt, US aid granted since the signing of the 1978 Camp David Accords was "untouchable compensation" for maintaining peace with Israel. This deal is considered a cornerstone of US-Egyptian relations.

Robert Springborg, a Middle East expert and non-resident fellow at the Italian Institute of International Affairs, told…that US economic support was intended to stabilize Anwar Sadat's (former Egyptian president) government and succeeding ones.

How does the US benefit?

The primary benefit is the "cessation of hostilities against Israel" by Egypt and "other Arab states that could not wage war against Israel in the absence of Egyptian participation", Springborg said.]

---

On this issue, you definitely have more studying to do.

I don't know where you got this, but if the conclusion was that buying Egypt's acceptance of Israel was the main reason for our support of Egypt in 1978, it is very much a distorted and narrow view of the thawing of U.S. - Egypt relations in the 1970s.

We had on and off strong relations with Egypt since its independence and that included providing them military and economic support back to the early 20th Century. Ironically, we limited support more based on Egypt's strengthening ties with Russia/China more than on Egypt's invasions of Israel.

As for the 1970s, there was so much going on at the time economically, politically, and militarily. And Sadat was a moderate unlike his predecessor. Again, he wanted peace with Israel and stronger ties with the U.S. its fledgling economy and political instability made it a necessity.

To say our support at the time was bribing him to make peace with Israel is absurd. We had just reestablished relations with Egypt. Our support resulted in the reopening of the canal and Egypt kicking the Soviets to the curb.

Would I be shocked if at some point in the Camp David talks Sadat asked us to sweeten the pot? No. But no objective person who understands the history can say Israel in a vacuum is why we supported Egypt in 1978. We had already supported Egypt, and our support in the late 20th Century got us so much more.

---

Absolutely agree there are many factors at play

But no middle expert or historian denies the fact that paying Egypt for peace with Israel is one of those factors

[Foreign aid: Peace has earned Egypt extensive aid from Washington. Cairo annually receives $1.3 billion in U.S. military assistance and $250 million in economic assistance. According to the Congressional Research Service, Egypt has accrued $69 billion from the United States since 1979, while Israel has gained $98 billion. In fact, the two countries have been the largest recipients of U.S. foreign aid since 1979.]



https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/reviewing-egypts-gains-its-peace-treaty-israel

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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..

---

I literally said from the get go it was not the only reason we pay Egypt

But yes…keeping the peace with Israel was and is one of the reasons we bribe them with American tax payer money

---

I mean, if it's a reason at all

---

Well historically it was the main reason at the beginning

[In the case of Egypt, US aid granted since the signing of the 1978 Camp David Accords was "untouchable compensation" for maintaining peace with Israel. This deal is considered a cornerstone of US-Egyptian relations.

Robert Springborg, a Middle East expert and non-resident fellow at the Italian Institute of International Affairs, told…that US economic support was intended to stabilize Anwar Sadat's (former Egyptian president) government and succeeding ones.

How does the US benefit?

The primary benefit is the "cessation of hostilities against Israel" by Egypt and "other Arab states that could not wage war against Israel in the absence of Egyptian participation", Springborg said.]

---

On this issue, you definitely have more studying to do.

I don't know where you got this, but if the conclusion was that buying Egypt's acceptance of Israel was the main reason for our support of Egypt in 1978, it is very much a distorted and narrow view of the thawing of U.S. - Egypt relations in the 1970s.

We had on and off strong relations with Egypt since its independence and that included providing them military and economic support back to the early 20th Century. Ironically, we limited support more based on Egypt's strengthening ties with Russia/China more than on Egypt's invasions of Israel.

As for the 1970s, there was so much going on at the time economically, politically, and militarily. And Sadat was a moderate unlike his predecessor. Again, he wanted peace with Israel and stronger ties with the U.S. its fledgling economy and political instability made it a necessity.

To say our support at the time was bribing him to make peace with Israel is absurd. We had just reestablished relations with Egypt. Our support resulted in the reopening of the canal and Egypt kicking the Soviets to the curb.

Would I be shocked if at some point in the Camp David talks Sadat asked us to sweeten the pot? No. But no objective person who understands the history can say Israel in a vacuum is why we supported Egypt in 1978. We had already supported Egypt, and our support in the late 20th Century got us so much more.

---

Absolutely agree there are many factors at play

But no middle expert or historian denies the fact that paying Egypt for peace with Israel is one of those factors

[Foreign aid: Peace has earned Egypt extensive aid from Washington. Cairo annually receives $1.3 billion in U.S. military assistance and $250 million in economic assistance. According to the Congressional Research Service, Egypt has accrued $69 billion from the United States since 1979, while Israel has gained $98 billion. In fact, the two countries have been the largest recipients of U.S. foreign aid since 1979.]



https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/reviewing-egypts-gains-its-peace-treaty-israel

---

The original point you made was about why we support Egypt, and you emphasizing "bribing" them for peace with Israel.

And that's just not true from the U.S. perspective. For us, dating back to earliest 20th Century through today, it's about having a strong relationship (and precluding strong Egypt - Russian/China relations) with arguably the most influential all around player in the ME and Africa. Again, there is a huge economic and military benefit to us.

I have no doubt - and agree with this author- that Egypt fears losing some or all of our support of it breaks peace with Israel. But there is zero chance Egypt does that anyway.

I've never accused you directly or indirectly of being racist or anti-Semitic and am. It now because I don't believe that.

But it is a common tactic of groups and people who are those things to say things like "we only do X because of Israel," and that is virtually never the case. It may or may not be a piece of much larger puzzle depending on the issue.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

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.

---

For no more than we spend, we should do it forever. Biggest bang for the buck out of any ally.

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.

---

We spend Trillions every year on our own people and our own problems. You feeling the impact? You think another couple Billion would help?

---

Yes....to the people who would be effected positively by that billion its very important

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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)

---

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?".

---

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

---

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.

---

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..

---

I literally said from the get go it was not the only reason we pay Egypt

But yes…keeping the peace with Israel was and is one of the reasons we bribe them with American tax payer money

---

I mean, if it's a reason at all

---

Well historically it was the main reason at the beginning

[In the case of Egypt, US aid granted since the signing of the 1978 Camp David Accords was "untouchable compensation" for maintaining peace with Israel. This deal is considered a cornerstone of US-Egyptian relations.

Robert Springborg, a Middle East expert and non-resident fellow at the Italian Institute of International Affairs, told…that US economic support was intended to stabilize Anwar Sadat's (former Egyptian president) government and succeeding ones.

How does the US benefit?

The primary benefit is the "cessation of hostilities against Israel" by Egypt and "other Arab states that could not wage war against Israel in the absence of Egyptian participation", Springborg said.]

---

On this issue, you definitely have more studying to do.

I don't know where you got this, but if the conclusion was that buying Egypt's acceptance of Israel was the main reason for our support of Egypt in 1978, it is very much a distorted and narrow view of the thawing of U.S. - Egypt relations in the 1970s.

We had on and off strong relations with Egypt since its independence and that included providing them military and economic support back to the early 20th Century. Ironically, we limited support more based on Egypt's strengthening ties with Russia/China more than on Egypt's invasions of Israel.

As for the 1970s, there was so much going on at the time economically, politically, and militarily. And Sadat was a moderate unlike his predecessor. Again, he wanted peace with Israel and stronger ties with the U.S. its fledgling economy and political instability made it a necessity.

To say our support at the time was bribing him to make peace with Israel is absurd. We had just reestablished relations with Egypt. Our support resulted in the reopening of the canal and Egypt kicking the Soviets to the curb.

Would I be shocked if at some point in the Camp David talks Sadat asked us to sweeten the pot? No. But no objective person who understands the history can say Israel in a vacuum is why we supported Egypt in 1978. We had already supported Egypt, and our support in the late 20th Century got us so much more.

---

Absolutely agree there are many factors at play

But no middle expert or historian denies the fact that paying Egypt for peace with Israel is one of those factors

[Foreign aid: Peace has earned Egypt extensive aid from Washington. Cairo annually receives $1.3 billion in U.S. military assistance and $250 million in economic assistance. According to the Congressional Research Service, Egypt has accrued $69 billion from the United States since 1979, while Israel has gained $98 billion. In fact, the two countries have been the largest recipients of U.S. foreign aid since 1979.]



https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/reviewing-egypts-gains-its-peace-treaty-israel

---

The original point you made was about why we support Egypt, and you emphasizing "bribing" them for peace with Israel.

.

---

Because it's one of the factors that no expert on the subject matter denies

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago - one piece of a grand bargain that has been historically successful, leading to decades of economic, military, and diplomatic cooperation between Israel, Egypt, and the U.S., and ultimately others.

Moderate Egyptian leaderships wanted and knew it needed to cooperate with Israel. But Egypt knew the rest of the Arab would ostracize it - and that is what happened. But it led to Egyptian economic prosperity, peace (mostly), and increased strength and influence. The only threat to Egypt over this entire time has been internal, which our support helps guard against.

The U.S. gained partnership with the most influential country in the ME/Africa. The U.S. regained use of the canal. The U.S. gained access to oil and gas. The U.S. gained and to this day benefits from Egyptian intel and diplomacy. Egypt removed all Russian military "advisors" and government "consultants." After dancing with and accepting billions from China, Egypt essentially distanced itself from China.

Israel, in exchange for giving up land and pledging other cooperation, got its first major muslim country partner, which has since blossomed into many more. This has benefited the Region and the world.

And there is much more.

Only someone with a major axe to grind would fail to acknowledge how wildly complex and successful this was and dismiss it as a "bribe to help Israel."

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

And we are still giving them billions almost 50 years later

In part so they keep the peace with Israel

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

---

your comments to Red reminded of the old adage: "....I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you......"

So many layers to the cake. Israel and Egypt and Suez are not important to us at all. Nope. Doesn't matter who goes to war with whom, or how many ships are sunk, how insurance and banking interest are lost by the sinkings, how many people starve, because none of that will have any impact whatsoever on what other nations do economically or militarily, or any impact whatsoever on the global economy to which we must buy or sell.....



If we sit astride those lines of commerce with responsible proxies like Israel and Egypt, we will have tremendous influence on fairly large part of the globe. With the people who buy the grain, and the people who sell the grain (one of which is a nuclear capable adversary). We don't have to threaten to do anything. The knife is laying on the skin just above the jugular. Everyone can see it. Notably, China and Russia are not able to sit in the same spot and use that influence against us and our allies.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

---

You are making arguments for why the bribes are good for US foreign policy

Not an argument that we are somehow not bribing the Egyptian government

(with peace for Israel being one of those key reasons since 1979)

whiterock said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

---

your comments to Red reminded of the old adage: "....I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you......"

So many layers to the cake. Israel and Egypt and Suez are not important to us at all. Nope. D

---

Of course they are

Sombear was incorrectly under the impression that we don't pay Egypt to be at peace with Israel (we have since the 70s)

When of course we do....and no historian or middle east expert denies that fact

Our many faceted relationship with Egypt and the other reasons for it are a different argument/discussion...Suez being of course another major reason...Egypt being the biggest population state in the middle east being another.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

---

On a different note....if you want to have a debate about if Egyptian aid is good for the US and for Egypt then Brookings has an article out that talks about the negatives of endless US aid/bribes for Egypt.

Making the augment it warps and hampers local reform inside Egypt (leadership class has no reason to change)

Again, their argument....and not mine...but still very interesting

[Egypt's military knows there has been only one constant in U.S. policy toward its country over the past three decades, including during the turbulence of the past three years: Regardless of who has been in power Hosni Mubarak, the military, Morsi and now the military again and how that government has behaved, military assistance has flowed. We didn't use our military aid to pressure Mubarak to reform; we didn't use it to pressure Morsi to govern more democratically; and we are not using it now to pressure the military to cease its violent, undemocratic behavior.

Leverage works only if there is a chance that it will be used. Given the United States' history of unwavering support for the Egyptian military, its threats to end aid have no credibility. At this point, only an actual cutoff or suspension would shape the military's calculations. To those who argue that we must continue providing aid in the interest of stability, one has only to point to the past three years: Aid has flowed uninterrupted, and just look at all the stability.]

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/american-aid-makes-the-u-s-complicit-in-the-egyptian-armys-acts/

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

---

You are making arguments for why the bribes are good for US foreign policy

Not an argument that we are somehow not bribing the Egyptian government

(with peace for Israel being one of those key reasons since 1979)

---

No, I'm not. I don't consider international relations to be bribery. When effective, it's mutually beneficial deal-making. And that's not semantical. Is it your position that al deals, treaties, arrangements, partnerships, etc. are bribes?

And the points you are missing (or maybe you just disagree, which is fine) are threefold:

One, even then, peace with Israel was a secondary issue. Not because it wasn't important but because Egypt and its moderates already wanted peace with Israel. And effectively that peace already existed by the late 1970s. Egypt had twice been defeated and knew continued wars or even strained relations would be devastating militarily and financially. Egypt primary concerns by then were economic and domestic radicalism.
Two, I argue that it is not at all a factor today. That ship has long sailed. Egypt has mostly thrived (in relative terms) since partnering with the U.S. and distancing itself from Russia and China. And we have benefited immensely also. We are supporting Egypt to maintains its influence over there, continue to keep Russia/China at bay, support trade, stabilize as much as possible an oil resource, access its intel, and help Egypt fend off its own radicals.

Finally, again, let's say for sake of argument, Egypt/Israel peace remains a key reason why we support Egypt, I still see no reason to single that out in making your argument. There is no dispute that there is so much more to what has proven to be a wildly successful story.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

---

You are making arguments for why the bribes are good for US foreign policy

Not an argument that we are somehow not bribing the Egyptian government

(with peace for Israel being one of those key reasons since 1979)

---

No, I'm not. I don't consider international relations to be bribery. When effective, it's mutually beneficial deal-making. And that's not semantical. Is it your position that al deals, treaties, arrangements, partnerships, etc. are bribes?

---

Lets not make the dishonest augment that treaties, trade deals, and political relationships....are the same as handing over $2 billion a year in American tax payer dollars.

You can have all 3 of the others without giving over pallets of cash

Does the US give the United Kingdom $2 billion a year to continue its mutually beneficial deals and maintain its treaties and partnerships?

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

---

You are making arguments for why the bribes are good for US foreign policy

Not an argument that we are somehow not bribing the Egyptian government

(with peace for Israel being one of those key reasons since 1979)

---

No, I'm not. I don't consider international relations to be bribery. When effective, it's mutually beneficial deal-making. And that's not semantical. Is it your position that al deals, treaties, arrangements, partnerships, etc. are bribes?

---

If you want to debate the effectiveness of foreign aid then read the article I posted

Or many of the pieces out in the American conservative that has several articles out criticizing the practice as detrimental to America and to the local countries that become hooked on the aid

We wrack up unsustainable debt....local countries get corruption fueled and most of the aid wasted

https://www.heritage.org/global-politics/report/americas-broken-foreign-aid-apparatus

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

What you call a "bribe" was - 47 years ago -

---

Bribe, foreign aid, any other term you want

At the end of the day the US government pays them tax payer money to influence Egypt

---

So are they bribing us by kicking Russia and China out of bed, providing us intel, allowing us to use the canal, trading with us, and lobbying on our behalf to other ME/Africa countries?

---

You are making arguments for why the bribes are good for US foreign policy

Not an argument that we are somehow not bribing the Egyptian government

(with peace for Israel being one of those key reasons since 1979)

---

No, I'm not. I don't consider international relations to be bribery. When effective, it's mutually beneficial deal-making. And that's not semantical. Is it your position that al deals, treaties, arrangements, partnerships, etc. are bribes?

---

If you want to debate the effectiveness of foreign aid then read the article I posted

Or many of the pieces out in the American conservative that has several articles out criticizing the practice as detrimental to America and to the local countries that become hooked on the aid

We wrack up unsustainable debt....local countries get corruption fueled and most of the aid wasted

https://www.heritage.org/global-politics/report/americas-broken-foreign-aid-apparatus

---

I agree with a lot of this. As we've discussed, I assess on a case-by-case basis. Egypt to me is a no-brainer.

Also important to note that China and Russia buy off countries even more.

Redbrickbear said:

---

The IDF might be another secret sauce behind the vigor of the Israeli people.

As I understand it, it's highly co-ed, and drafts basically everyone at 18.

Your Israeli youth is "launched" in life whether he likes it or not.

Can't really do the video game thing at Mom's. pic.twitter.com/qM07raseSK

— VB Knives (@Empty_America) December 24, 2024

---

Why play video games when you can live the real thing?

Seriously, though, Israel doesn't have any choice. They are surrounded by enemies who have always wanted to wipe them out as in eliminate and annihilate. It has worked so well for them that they have several friendly neighbors.

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

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.

---

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.

Allies pay back their debts.

Enemies do not.

---

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

---

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.

---

......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).

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.

---

Israel is important to Americans here at home, a strong majority of which support the existence of the Jewish state.

---

They are armed to the teeth and have nuclear weapons

Let's all stop this fantasy that the existence of the Jewish state is somehow under grave threat

(Not to mention their local Arab and Persian enemies are basically incompetent)

---

Even if true, they didn't get there by accident. They needed our (and others) help, they kicked ass, and they never took their eye of the ball.

But I disagree with your premise. They will always be under threat because they are surrounded by whackos who want to destroy them and many of which want to die for their cause.

---

Lets say your right and they will "always be under threat and surrounded by whackos"

Why should the American people and tax payers be endlessly on the hook to protect the Jews there so they can have their own ethno-state surrounded by Arab muslims?

Are we gonna be funding them 100 years into the future? 500 years into the future? 1,000 years?

When did we have a national conversation about how the DC elite were signing us up for supporting one side in a never ending racial/ethnic conflict on the other side of the planet....

---

Because quite literally, it is in our interests to have more stability in the Middle East. And a strong Israel at peace does more than anything else to stabilize the region. It's that simple. Egypt, Jordan, & Saudi Arabia realize that. It's beyond me why so many Americans cannot see the obvious. The antisemitism of a few bigoted morons do not explain this willful ignorance.