...because we don't want to see a genocide take place.Really what annoys me is why people get so heated on Israel? We aren’t arabs or Jews why should we care about those squabbles they don’t concern us
...because we don't want to see a genocide take place.Really what annoys me is why people get so heated on Israel? We aren’t arabs or Jews why should we care about those squabbles they don’t concern us
It won't though. And why do we care about a genocide here, but don't care about random genocides in Africa?...because we don't want to see a genocide take place.
Really what annoys me is why people get so heated on Israel? We aren’t arabs or Jews why should we care about those squabbles they don’t concern us
Really what annoys me is why people get so heated on Israel? We aren’t arabs or Jews why should we care about those squabbles they don’t concern us
So tedious and boring that you have a habit of reading all my posts and then taking the time to actually respond? That's borderline schizophrenic, to be blunt about it.
I think it gets more interesting when you further contextualize the fact that no one in this thread has actually been able to engage in the arguments presented, you just automatically resort to personal attacks which should be telling about your own beliefs. Beyond that though, the fact you have to lie and dodge about what was actually said is equally telling. The user in question is against White Nationalism according to his sig-fair enough. My point, which if you had bothered to read what was stated, is that it is hypocritical then to support what he self described as a Jewish ethno-state in Israel which he freely concedes treats its Jews better over the Arabs in racial discrimination.
I asked him to defend this blatant contradiction and he could only respond by citing Jewish history as giving them the right to such. I then retorted by asking if he buys into the theory of White Privilege so as to disqualify White Nationalists from the same. If you prefer another example, to make this clearer, would you support a Black ethno-state in the United States? Blacks have a history of discrimination and oppression here, only being able to vote in most cases from 1965 onwards. Does that history of oppression qualify them, the same as the Jewish history qualifies them for an Ethno-State? If no, then why does Israel get a pass? It's a very upfront question. The fact it can't be answered should force many to reconsider their beliefs about Israel, especially given it has been freely conceded that Arabs are discriminated against.
This is all very easily to follow and very basic logical thinking. I can only conclude you're either being willfully obtuse or are unable to fundamentally engage in any sort of debate, in which case why are you here?
Apparently you don't do all that much reading either.So tedious and boring that you have a habit of reading all my posts and then taking the time to actually respond? That's borderline schizophrenic, to be blunt about it.
I fully admit to only reading this opening shot before responding to it, and that I didn't bother reading further since I know it would be a waste of time.Dude, half the time I don't even bother to reading the stuff you post anymore. You seriously come off as a shill, and stuff like this (especially the crap about white nationalists and white privilege) does not help you in any kind of debate or discussion here. At best it makes for some humorous reading of some very NPC-like ranting, but mostly it's just tedious and boring. The only real upshot of anything you've said in this thread is that you do not seem to grasp reality, mostly because you have a giant hate boner for Israel.
This should be the default take, and should be reflected in our foreign policy. The fact we've given them $150 Billion in direct aid alone is enough to give us a stake in the game, but even beyond that people simply aren't given a choice: For example, did you know you have to sign a loyalty oath to Israel in many professions? We don't even require an oath to the United States, but we do for Israel and I challenge anyone to explain that to me in a rational way.
If it is true,then USA are more fucked then i thought.I knew,that Izrael own it,but that kind of oath is something else.
Because unlike the genocides in Africa, it's one we'd be directly responsible for. Before the end of World War 2, anti-Jewish sentament was deeply ingrained into western culture, to the point where it took seeing something as horrific as Auschwitz to convince people that treating the Jews like crap might be wrong. But even then, that only convinced the elites of our society that we needed to get rid of the Jews in a more "humane" manner; which led to them trying to create a country in the Middle East for them to all live in. We all know how that turned out; and ever since, western civilization has been tied to Israel in a way that we cannot break without condoning the slaughter of Jews that would inevitably come afterwards.It won't though. And why do we care about a genocide here, but don't care about random genocides in Africa?
Because unlike the genocides in Africa, it's one we'd be directly responsible for. Before the end of World War 2, anti-Jewish sentament was deeply ingrained into western culture, to the point where it took seeing something as horrific as Auschwitz to convince people that treating the Jews like crap might be wrong. But even then, that only convinced the elites of our society that we needed to get rid of the Jews in a more "humane" manner; which led to them trying to create a country in the Middle East for them to all live in. We all know how that turned out; and ever since, western civilization has been tied to Israel in a way that we cannot break without condoning the slaughter of Jews that would inevitably come afterwards.
Because unlike the genocides in Africa, it's one we'd be directly responsible for. Before the end of World War 2, anti-Jewish sentament was deeply ingrained into western culture, to the point where it took seeing something as horrific as Auschwitz to convince people that treating the Jews like crap might be wrong. But even then, that only convinced the elites of our society that we needed to get rid of the Jews in a more "humane" manner; which led to them trying to create a country in the Middle East for them to all live in. We all know how that turned out; and ever since, western civilization has been tied to Israel in a way that we cannot break without condoning the slaughter of Jews that would inevitably come afterwards.
Is it really that ridiculous?Not even trying to hide it anymore, are they?
It's not so much "loyalty to Israel" as never to boycott Israel... but yeah. Rather openly saying that the needs of another country are more important to them than their own.
The US foots the bill for Iron Dome, just as it does for most of Israel’s other weapons development, for self-interested reasons: because it helps its own war industries, as Washington seeks to maintain its military dominance globally.
Israel has also been the ideal partner for the Pentagon in testing and refining the battlefield use of the new generation of F-35 fighter planes, the most expensive military product in US history. Uniquely, Israel has been allowed to customize the jet, adapting its capabilities in new, unforeseen ways.
Seriously, if someone didn't know better they may think it was written by AIPAC.The US has its own interception systems under development, and it is unclear which it will come to rely on most heavily. But what is evident is that Washington, Israel and their Gulf allies have Iran in their immediate sights. Any country that refuses to bow to US global hegemony could also be targeted.
US interest in these missiles is not defensive. They are fundamental to its ability to neutralize the responses of rivals to either a US military attack, or more general moves by the US to dominate territory and control resources.
TBH the right to self determination and concept of nation-states specifically exist to solve this kind of problems. And it is a timeless kind of problems - namely, multiculturalism not working. Its pretty common, and the most obvious solution is have random populations and subcultures that don't see eye to eye with others within the same state split off into their own, so that they can practice their own government, laws and ways, instead of trying to make compromises that will inevitably keep one or both group unhappy forever.But even then, that only convinced the elites of our society that we needed to get rid of the Jews in a more "humane" manner; which led to them trying to create a country in the Middle East for them to all live in.
Speak for yourself.Really what annoys me is why people get so heated on Israel? We aren’t arabs or Jews why should we care about those squabbles they don’t concern us
Is it really that ridiculous?
Lets compare a hypothetical.
If few organizations and government employees in Japan were to boycott Taiwan over not surrendering to China and drag said organization's business decisions into it...
Do you think the government would just shrug at it?
Yeah, i would not be so sure about that. Governments are kinda sensitive about their international alliances, and generally aren't too happy about their employees and contractors openly trying to screw with their allies. Random minor institutions are not entitled to run their own foreign policy, its not that crazy to ask them to promise not to try.
TBH the right to self determination and concept of nation-states specifically exist to solve this kind of problems. And it is a timeless kind of problems - namely, multiculturalism not working. Its pretty common, and the most obvious solution is have random populations and subcultures that don't see eye to eye with others within the same state split off into their own, so that they can practice their own government, laws and ways, instead of trying to make compromises that will inevitably keep one or both group unhappy forever.
Is it really that ridiculous?
Lets compare a hypothetical.
If few organizations and government employees in Japan were to boycott Taiwan over not surrendering to China and drag said organization's business decisions into it...
Do you think the government would just shrug at it?
Yeah, i would not be so sure about that. Governments are kinda sensitive about their international alliances, and generally aren't too happy about their employees and contractors openly trying to screw with their allies. Random minor institutions are not entitled to run their own foreign policy, its not that crazy to ask them to promise not to try.
The aid issue is definitely more reasonable to bring up, a lot of that is hidden subsidy to defense industry (most of that aid has to be spent shopping in USA), some is also cooperative programs for technological developments from which USA gets nice toys (Iron Dome), so there is a good non-ideological argument to at least rationalize that stuff and label is as what it is.
On the other hand, both the pro-Israel and more hilariously, vehemently anti-Israel side observers do agree that at least some of that military cooperation is guided by US self-interest (in the latter case they mean US self-interest as a bad thing of course), like here:
Iron Dome Funding: Don't Be Deceived US Aid to Israel Is Not About Saving Lives - Antiwar.com Original
Battles in the US Congress that erupted again this week, holding up an extra $1bn in military funding for Israel, underscored just how divorced from - Jonathan Cook for Antiwar.com Originaloriginal.antiwar.com
Seriously, if someone didn't know better they may think it was written by AIPAC.
TBH the right to self determination and concept of nation-states specifically exist to solve this kind of problems. And it is a timeless kind of problems - namely, multiculturalism not working. Its pretty common, and the most obvious solution is have random populations and subcultures that don't see eye to eye with others within the same state split off into their own, so that they can practice their own government, laws and ways, instead of trying to make compromises that will inevitably keep one or both group unhappy forever.
Israel provides a pretty wide range of benefits to the US.Why? Answer me that, with evidence, not base-less assertions. Explain to me why American blood and treasure is somehow obligated to be given to Israel.
A good look at the Use it or things go wrong, after World War 2, during Korea, things were like that. Truman had civilian plants building tanks long after they stopped and they were not used to it and were turning out a bad productIsrael provides a pretty wide range of benefits to the US.
Trade: Israel/US trade is around 10 billion a year. No, that's not completely staggering, I mean the UK trade is about 45 billion for the same time period. OTOH, the UK has about seven and a half times Israel's population too, a much worse ratio. Per person and for its economic size, Israel does a lot of business with the US and that means profits for US companies.
Research: Israel does a lot of research, in fact on a per-capita basis, Israel has about half again as many scientists and technicians as the US does. This translates into Israel producing a lot of useful inventions. Israel's at the bleeding edge of medical research, f'rex, top of the planet there, and their inventions benefit all Americans as well, often disproportionately to Israel itself. Israel also has some of the absolute top water and agricultural technologies and research divisions, both in areas of conserving water and things like their cutting-edge desalination plants.
Military: Israel sends troops, supplies, and support to America's military. No, the numbers, again, aren't staggering because Israel has a population smaller than Los Angeles County, but they do send significant forces for their size to support US operations. Israel also provides a rare area in the Middle East that's relatively safe and stable for the US to store supplies in. Israeli military inventions, such as Iron Dome, also wind up in American hands for greater benefits.
And the amount of blood and treasure spent on Israel is pretty grossly overestimated. Much of the money sent to Israel isn't actually sent to them, it's thinly disguised handouts to American weapons manufacturers, as Israel is obligated to spend much of the funds the US sends there. Those companies get more business and get to see their weaponry in actual action which keeps them sharp and helps them spot deficiencies or areas for improvement, an opportunity that might not exist without Israel. This is also critical because a weapons company needs to do a certain amount of business every year in order to stay open, real life isn't an RTS where you can just build a factory and leave it there until you want to spit out some more tanks. If you don't constantly build tanks, the company can't stay open, the employees go find other jobs, and then when you get into a pinch you can't actually build any tanks when you need them because nobody's left who knows how to build a tank anymore. It's thus critical to have somebody, anybody, buying a certain number of each weapon per year to keep the factories healthy, and Israel is an extremely convenient partner for that.
Other chunks of cash are research grants which, as noted, tremendously benefit Americans. As far as blood, there just aren't that many Americans who died in, say, the Yom Kippur war. Compared with, say, Afghanistan, Israel generally fights their own battles and spills Israeli blood, not American, defending their borders, but also send Israelis to die in American wars, such as, again, Afghanistan. The cost-benefit leans pretty heavily to the US getting a lot out of their relationship with Israel.
A good look at the Use it or things go wrong, after World War 2, during Korea, things were like that. Truman had civilian plants building tanks long after they stopped and they were not used to it and were turning out a bad product