historian said:

---

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….

---

True

But not sure giving billions a year to multiple players over there is the best way to achieve that

How do you know that? It is very likely that some of those billions was wasted (we are talking about Washington, after all) but we cannot assume all of it was. It's already been well established that our aid to Israel is a wise investment. The case has also been made for Egypt, although I think it was a mistake to bribe them into joining the Gulf War coalition against Saddam Hussein. That was in their interest & should not have required one penny from the US. The same is true for every other member of that coalition, especially from that region.

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?

---

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?

---

The vast majority of aid to Egypt and Israel are through the Foreign Military Financing program, which means most of the aid comes back to the US via defense contracts and contractors. The UK purchases a good amount of U.S. military equipment through private direct sales, although not as much since they have a sizable domestic defense industry.

I mean if you combined the annual non defense related aid for Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey (our most significant allies in the region) maybe it's a Billion dollars. But this argument isn't about the money, it's the party involved that burns you up.

Redbrickbear said:

---

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 is absolutely correct on this. The aid was the decisive inducement to getting Egypt to sign the Camp David accords; but Egypt-Israel peace is no longer the primary reason for the aid. There are a long list of reasons for it, one of which you alluded to - Egypt's population. Egypt is a major power in the region (along with Saudi, Turkey, and Iran.) We have manageably good relationships with three of those powers, which isolates the fourth (Iran). As a result, trade flows for everyone, benefitting us directly or indirectly in a variety of ways. and, of course, we don't; have to directly attack Iran. We have a range of options to keep them in their cubby hole, to include an Israel fighting largely with the same front-line weaponry our soldiers would have to use. We get to see how our stuff works in battle, without risking any of our blood to do so. We also get to see how Iran responds (i.e. what their capabilities are.)

I know, I know that sounds awfully cold & predatory. But when WWII broke out in the Pacific, our torpedoes didn't explode when they hit Japanese ships. Had to fix that in real time. Lost time, money, and lives as a result. Scout's Motto applies here. It's always good to know your knives will cut the things they're supposed to cut before the knife fight starts.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear 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.

---

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….

---

True

But not sure giving billions a year to multiple players over there is the best way to achieve that

---

FACT: The aid is how you influence behavior. You literally give the aid so you can have the leverage of threatening to withdraw it.

---

If you read the article it shows that the Egyptian military knows any threat is all bluster....and that the DC money spigot will never be turned off

I assume the case is similar with Israel and many other nations on the US payroll

[Milton Friedman used to say that nothing was so permanent as a temporary government program]

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.

---

Israel are the wackos and it is a terrorist state.

ATL Bear said:

---

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?

---

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?

---

The vast majority of aid to Egypt and Israel are through the Foreign Military Financing program, which means most of the aid comes back to the US via defense contracts and contractors. The UK purchases a good amount of U.S. military equipment through private direct sales, although not as much since they have a sizable domestic defense industry.

I mean if you combined the annual non defense related aid for Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey (our most significant allies in the region) maybe it's a Billion dollars. But this argument isn't about the money, it's the party involved that burns you up.

---

I dont care if 99% of it comes back to the US.

It never should have been stolen and sent overseas in the first place.

We should have massive tax cuts and federal income tax should be less than 5%.

You, whiterock, and sombear should be taxed at 95% before a single penny is taken from the rest of us...

ATL Bear said:

---

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?

---

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?

---

The vast majority of aid to Egypt and Israel are through the Foreign Military Financing program, which means most of the aid comes back to the US via defense contracts and contractors. The UK purchases a good amount of U.S. military equipment through private direct sales, although not as much since they have a sizable domestic defense industry.

I mean if you combined the annual non defense related aid for Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey (our most significant allies in the region) maybe it's a Billion dollars. But this argument isn't about the money, it's the party involved that burns you up.

---

None of these countries are our "allies".

None of those countries have ever done a damn thing for us.

Some have outright attacked us - Saudis and Israelis.

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

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?

---

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?

---

The vast majority of aid to Egypt and Israel are through the Foreign Military Financing program, which means most of the aid comes back to the US via defense contracts and contractors. The UK purchases a good amount of U.S. military equipment through private direct sales, although not as much since they have a sizable domestic defense industry.

I mean if you combined the annual non defense related aid for Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey (our most significant allies in the region) maybe it's a Billion dollars. But this argument isn't about the money, it's the party involved that burns you up.

---

I dont care if 99% of it comes back to the US.

It never should have been stolen and sent overseas in the first place.

We should have massive tax cuts and federal income tax should be less than 5%.

You, whiterock, and sombear should be taxed at 95% before a single penny is taken from the rest of us...

---

lol

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear 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.

---

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….

---

True

But not sure giving billions a year to multiple players over there is the best way to achieve that

---

FACT: The aid is how you influence behavior. You literally give the aid so you can have the leverage of threatening to withdraw it.

---

If you read the article it shows that the Egyptian military knows any threat is all bluster....and that the DC money spigot will never be turned off

I assume the case is similar with Israel and many other nations on the US payroll

[Milton Friedman used to say that nothing was so permanent as a temporary government program]

---

What planet are you guys living on? We do shut off aid to show our displeasure. We do reduce aid to show our displeasure. We delay aid to show our displeasure.

So many examples. Most recent? Biden restricting military resupply to Israel.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear 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.

---

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….

---

True

But not sure giving billions a year to multiple players over there is the best way to achieve that

---

FACT: The aid is how you influence behavior. You literally give the aid so you can have the leverage of threatening to withdraw it.

---

If you read the article it shows that the Egyptian military knows any threat is all bluster....and that the DC money spigot will never be turned off

I assume the case is similar with Israel and many other nations on the US payroll

[Milton Friedman used to say that nothing was so permanent as a temporary government program]

---

What planet are you guys living on? We do shut off aid to show our displeasure. We do reduce aid to show our displeasure. We delay aid to show our displeasure.

So many examples. Most recent? Biden restricting military resupply to Israel.

---

Israel can't build its own weapons?

It has to rely on American tax payers to give them free weapons? And some say it's not a welfare queen….

PS

Biden never actually stopped any of the weapons from getting to Israel or stopped any of the money transfers

The United States is a sovereign country, so I don’t assign any credibility to decisions of the International Criminal Court. But how did a bill to protect Netanyahu make it into the House rules package to be voted on immediately after the Speaker vote? Where are our priorities?! pic.twitter.com/kwowJHqkPG

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) January 1, 2025

I think everyone knows what the priorities of the US Congress are by now.

When Mike Johnson was elected Speaker the first time, he ascended the tribunal to unveil the priorities of his Speakership, and said the first bill would be to help "our dear friend Israel." https://t.co/MKOuPJrqQV

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 1, 2025

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I think everyone knows what the priorities of the US Congress are by now.

When Mike Johnson was elected Speaker the first time, he ascended the tribunal to unveil the priorities of his Speakership, and said the first bill would be to help "our dear friend Israel." https://t.co/MKOuPJrqQV

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 1, 2025

---

This is perfect. On a day of multiple acts of Muslim terrorism, let's get mad about the Jews and our close relationship with the one free and non-Muslim country in the Middle East!

---

You can actually post about multiple topics on a single day

And you can point out two groups of middle eastern peoples taking advantage of American generosity……

Both who also hate each other

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I think everyone knows what the priorities of the US Congress are by now.

When Mike Johnson was elected Speaker the first time, he ascended the tribunal to unveil the priorities of his Speakership, and said the first bill would be to help "our dear friend Israel." https://t.co/MKOuPJrqQV

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 1, 2025

---

This is perfect. On a day of multiple acts of Muslim terrorism, let's get mad about the Jews and our close relationship with the one free and non-Muslim country in the Middle East!

---

You can actually post about multiple topics on a single day

And you can point out two groups of middle eastern peoples taking advantage of American generosity……

Both who also hate each other

---

Sure, just as politicians can address more than one issue on a given day or in a given week, which makes the Massie's and Greenwald's post all the sillier and ill-timed.

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

Because quite literally, it is in our interests to have more stability in the Middle East….

---

True

But not sure giving billions a year to multiple players over there is the best way to achieve that

---

FACT: The aid is how you influence behavior. You literally give the aid so you can have the leverage of threatening to withdraw it.

---

If you read the article it shows that the Egyptian military knows any threat is all bluster....and that the DC money spigot will never be turned off

I assume the case is similar with Israel and many other nations on the US payroll

[Milton Friedman used to say that nothing was so permanent as a temporary government program]

---

What planet are you guys living on? We do shut off aid to show our displeasure. We do reduce aid to show our displeasure. We delay aid to show our displeasure.

So many examples. Most recent? Biden restricting military resupply to Israel.

---

Israel can't build its own weapons?
Israel does build it's own weapons. They build their own small arms, armored vehicles, etc....., but I think you well understand that they do not have the economy of scale to run production lines for things like 4th & 5th generation fighter jets (as well as related systems).

It has to rely on American tax payers to give them free weapons? And some say it's not a welfare queen….
They use aid to purchase things they cannot make, mostly fighter jets and specialized weapons systems.


PS

Biden never actually stopped any of the weapons from getting to Israel or stopped any of the money transfers.
....but they did use the threat of withholding approvals of resupply to coerce behavior, which is the issue at hand - you said aid is a waste, and I provided you with a current example of how it is used to increase US diplomatic leverage with one of our closest allies. That kind of leverage is one of the benefits of weapons sales abroad = if you sell one of your top weapon systems, you can attach limitations on how those weapons are used. And we do.....(see Ukraine). We do it every time we sell. It's a tremendous force-multiplier - countries talking themselves out of taking military actions which might negatively impact their ability to get resupply from the USA. It forces those countries to have pro-active dialogue with the USG about their grievances and proposed remedies, to get implicit US approval before taking action.

---

Israel has its own unique upgrades for many of the things it buys from us. It developed an active anti-tank system, "Trophy," which is superior to any other system in the world. We liked it so much that we wanted to purchase rights to it and add it to our Bradley AFV. Problem is, the Bradley power system cannot handle it. So we developed the XM-30 to replace the Bradley, in no small part to make employment of Trophy possible.

Military aid is a good way to beta-test your stuff. Nations will use them in training in all kinds of environments, all kinds of roles for which the systems were not specifically designed. You get a chance to find out the weaknesses of your stuff & fix it, or to discover what changes in strategies & tactics are needed to work around the problem.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I think everyone knows what the priorities of the US Congress are by now.

When Mike Johnson was elected Speaker the first time, he ascended the tribunal to unveil the priorities of his Speakership, and said the first bill would be to help "our dear friend Israel." https://t.co/MKOuPJrqQV

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 1, 2025

---

This is perfect. On a day of multiple acts of Muslim terrorism, let's get mad about the Jews and our close relationship with the one free and non-Muslim country in the Middle East!

---

Exactly. Over a provision that will cost us not one dollar.

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I think everyone knows what the priorities of the US Congress are by now.

When Mike Johnson was elected Speaker the first time, he ascended the tribunal to unveil the priorities of his Speakership, and said the first bill would be to help "our dear friend Israel." https://t.co/MKOuPJrqQV

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 1, 2025

---

This is perfect. On a day of multiple acts of Muslim terrorism, let's get mad about the Jews and our close relationship with the one free and non-Muslim country in the Middle East!

---

You can actually post about multiple topics on a single day

And you can point out two groups of middle eastern peoples taking advantage of American generosity……

Both who also hate each other

---

no middle eastern group has taken advantage of American generosity more than the Palestinians. Almost every dollar they received, regardless of ostensible intent, was/is applied to an effort to destroy an American ally.

Providing aid to a government entity you have listed as a terrorist group is the profoundly dumb. Never should have given Hamas a penny until they signed a peace agreement with all of their neighbors.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I think everyone knows what the priorities of the US Congress are by now.

When Mike Johnson was elected Speaker the first time, he ascended the tribunal to unveil the priorities of his Speakership, and said the first bill would be to help "our dear friend Israel." https://t.co/MKOuPJrqQV

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 1, 2025

---

This is perfect. On a day of multiple acts of Muslim terrorism, let's get mad about the Jews and our close relationship with the one free and non-Muslim country in the Middle East!

---

You can actually post about multiple topics on a single day

And you can point out two groups of middle eastern peoples taking advantage of American generosity……

Both who also hate each other

---

Never should have given Hamas a penny until they signed a peace agreement with all of their neighbors.

---

Never should have given Hamas any money

Honestly think most Americans are over giving people in that part of the world billions and watching them constantly kill each other

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I think everyone knows what the priorities of the US Congress are by now.

When Mike Johnson was elected Speaker the first time, he ascended the tribunal to unveil the priorities of his Speakership, and said the first bill would be to help "our dear friend Israel." https://t.co/MKOuPJrqQV

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 1, 2025

---

This is perfect. On a day of multiple acts of Muslim terrorism, let's get mad about the Jews and our close relationship with the one free and non-Muslim country in the Middle East!

---

Antisemitism is never rational. Same with all other forms of bigotry.