[tomder55]

A Nation Like OursYes from a realpolitik calculation it would make much more sense to abandon Israel . But thankfully foreign policy is not always measured by pure self interest .

A good start to understanding would be to read <a href=http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/001/225tpziw.asp >A Nation Like Ours Why Americans stand with Israel</a> by David Gelernter .He explains that the US and Israel have shared experiences in the founding of our respective nations.

[an interesting sidenote ;David Gelernter was one of the unibomber's victims ]

I think that if there were no Jews in America at all ,that the US would still support Israel due to our common experience of creating a nation from an idea ;a dream. Settlers in both countries saw lands that were essentially unused empty space and through hard work cultivated the land and made it prosperous. They like us built it and deserve to own it."We hope to plant a nation, where none before hath stood."

Beyond that the jihadists of the Middle East would still loathe America, even if we didn't support Israel. America is the "Great Satan".OBL and his al-Qaeda freeks did not mention Israel in their original fatwas against us.

Israel is a democracy in the Middle East,surrounded by antagonistic Islamic regimes. It does not deserve to be forced out of existence by hateful neighbors. America supports Israel because it can count onto be an ally like nobody else in the region.

[ScottGem]

Why does the USA support Israel?

Let me take a different tack here. Let me ask you to answer these questions

1) Do you believe that the State of Israel has a right to exist?

2) Do you believe that a sovereign state has a right to defend itself against attack?

3) Do you believe its right for any military organization to hide behind civilians?

[NeedKarma]

Scott, you're going a bit overboard don't you think? If one asks "Why does the USA support Israel?" why do you need to ask "Do you believe that the State of Israel has a right to exist?"? Isn't that a little confrontational? It's like asking "Why did IBM sell their laptop business to China?" and you respond "Do you believe that the China has a right to exist?".

Why not just answer the question cooly and with facts? I think tomder did a pretty good job of that.

What gets tiresome is the constant trotting out of the persecution complex.

[excon]

Hello again, Need:

Ummh, ummmh, ummh. Couple things. I'm a Jew. I was born in 1943. IF I happened to have been born in the country my parents had emigrated from, I would have found myself tattooed and screwed. That's MYSELF – ME – my perfect little body.

Frankly, I have every right to inform you how the Jews have been persecuted, because – they have. And, but for an accident of my birth, it WOULD have been me. That's personal, dude!

However, you have never heard me or Scott play the poor Jew card. That we deserve this stuff because the world did us dirty. Your characterization of his arguments as “persecution complex” oriented, just ain't so. Certainly, you don't think I sound persecuted.

Nope, my and Scotts arguments have been quite cool, under the circumstances, and quite factual. So, instead of talking about him and me personally, why don't you address the facts we present??

I think it's because you just aren't able. I'm waiting……….

excon

[NeedKarma]

I mentioned that tomder presented some good facts. You guys just jumped all over the OP. This thread isn't about the Holocaust as much as you'd like it to me, it's about someone wondering why the U.S. offers so much support to another country.

[excon]

Hello again, Need:

You're still talking about us. I'm not interesting. Argue with what I say, not who I am.

Still waiting...

excon

[NeedKarma]

You brought up who you are.

Still waiting...

[ScottGem]

Scott, you're going a bit overboard don't you think?

No I don't. I have, previously, answered the question cooly and factually. Nor do I believe I am exhibiting a persecution complex.

I have been told I am wrong in applying the anti-semite tag here. The purpose of these questions is to help me determine if I was wrong in doing so. I believe the answers to those questions will help me formulate a better answer. Like I said I'm trying a different tack in dealing with this issue.

This thread isn't about the Holocaust as much as you'd like it to me, it's about someone wondering why the U.S. offers so much support to another country.

I think that part of the question was answered early on. The OP wasn't "jumped" on until he kept ignoring the true facts. He has opened up another issue by constantly promoting propaganda and rhetoric.

[NeedKarma]

As much as I was curious to the answer of the original question I do agree that the OP went in different direction with the whole "murderer" tagging. I was more interested in why such a large mount of funds has been diverted there for so many years while other domestic and international ills ravaged on with little support.

[talaniman]

With all the crazies with bombs and wanting to blow somebody up, don't you think a few friends would come in handy?? If you look at a map don't you see the only thing stopping the whole region from being NUTS is Israel? And last, but not least since we have the same enemies doesn't it make a lot of sense to be allied with Israel?? Am I the only one up this early who can see this?? Oh, If we didn't support Israel, what do you think them terrorist would do after they bombed Israel to bits? Didn't WWII teach you guys anything about what happens when some one hates you and nobody stands up to them?

[NeedKarma]

Didn't WWII teach you guys anything about what happens when some one hates you and nobody stands up to them?

But that happens in many African countries and the U.S. doesn't step in. Why?

[talaniman]

African affairs are tribal in almost every case and The middle east is regional. Also upon further thought, we should stop giving money to the Jews, and instead send them all the guns, and bombs, and nukes they need. Would that satisfy everyone?

[NeedKarma]

Tribal or regional, who cares, genocide is genocide right?

[talaniman]

Yes it is, but that's another thread.

[NeedKarma]

Roger that.

[excon]

I have been told I am wrong in applying the anti-semite tag here. The purpose of these questions is to help me determine if I was wrong in doing so.

Hello again:

Scott is so much more logical and introspective, than I am. Maybe that's the computer geek in him. The above applies to me too, and I wonder if I'm wrong...

Ok! Wondering over. I'm not wrong! I think the thoughts presented here ARE based on anti-Semitism, rather than on history. I would rather NOT think so, but arguments against the facts, both Scott and I have presented, have been NON EXISTENT. In the absence of argument, what am I left with, but prejudice?

I WAS wrong, however, to say so, because the thread became about THAT instead of the politics. My bad. Ok, I did that. Sorry. If I've falsely accused anyone here of bigotry, show me.

Indeed, at this stage of the discussion, I think it's incumbent on you guys to argue, with facts on the ground, how your positions are NOT anti-Semitic.

In the absence of that, there's really nothing more to say, except – Go Jews!

excon

[talaniman]

I am not a Jew
I am not a computer geek
I don't know if I am anti semantic
I do know the same fools who drove airplanes into the World Trade buildings hate America
I do know terrorist HATE Jews (they said so)
I do know all this debate does goes back to hatred
I do know I have all the facts say US vs THEM for survival.
Who's side should America be on??
With the absence of common sense... Go BEARS

[tomder55]

Perhaps if there wasn't such a visceral reaction when this issue is presented then rational dialogue would be possible . Certainly I do not blame someone like EXCON for his responses. Most times when the issue is discussed invariably the issue of the "Jewish Lobby " and their "manipulations" of American politics,government , and press is mentioned.

Consider the essay published by professors John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt of Harvard University entitled The Israel Lobby and US Policy

http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011/$File/rwp_06_011_walt.pdf#search='the%20israel%20lobby'

. They argue that US supports Israel even to the detriment of the US;basically anti-Israeli propaganda masquerading as scholarship in my view . It is full of errors of fact, logic and deliberate omission.

U.S. foreign policy shapes events in every corner of the globe. Nowhere is this truer than in the Middle East, a region of recurring instability and enormous strategic importance. Most recently, the Bush Administration’s attempt to transform the region into a community of democracies has helped produce a resilient insurgency in Iraq, a sharp rise in world oil prices, and terrorist bombings in Madrid, London, and Amman. With so much at stake for so many, all countries need to understand the forces that drive U.S. Middle East policy.
The U.S. national interest should be the primary object of American foreign policy. For the past several decades, however, and especially since the Six Day War in 1967, the centerpiece of U.S. Middle East policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering U.S. support for Israel and the related effort to spread democracy throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security.

To prove that it is basically anti-Semitic all you have to do is read the reaction of some of America's most renown biggots ;like David Duke who said

"It is quite satisfying to see a body in the premier American university essentially come out and validate every major point I have been making since even before the war even started."

(NY Sun)

David Gergen who served for Presidents of both parties called the essay An Unfair Attack

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/060403/3edit.htm

.

Over the course of four tours in the White House, I never once saw a decision in the Oval Office to tilt U.S. foreign policy in favor of Israel at the expense of America's interest. Other than Richard Nixon--who occasionally said terrible things about Jews, despite the number on his team--I can't remember any president even talking about an Israeli lobby. Perhaps I have forgotten, but I can remember plenty of conversations about the power of the American gun lobby, environmentalists, evangelicals, small-business owners, and teachers unions.

He goes on to make this key observation...

10 straight American presidents have befriended Israel--not because they were under pressure but because they believed America had made a commitment to Israel's survival, just as we have to other threatened outposts of freedom like Berlin, South Korea, and Taiwan.

That's right .The US has made a commitment to shed blood and treasure to defend nations all over the world . Recently Bush reaffirmed our strong commitment to the defense of Taiwan ,which could potentially bring us to nuclear confrontation . Also foreign pressure has penetrated the halls of US gvt besides the Jewish lobby... the Saudi princes come immediately to mind .So it is disingenuous to point out the "jewish lobby " as the reason for our support .

[ordinaryguy]

So it is disingenuous to point out the "jewish lobby " as the reason for our support .

You're the first person to mention it.

[ordinaryguy]

Let me take a different tack here. Let me ask you to answer these questions
1) Do you believe that the State of Israel has a right to exist?

In the current (2006-2007) geopolitical context, yes.

2) Do you believe that a sovereign state has a right to defend itself against attack?

Yes, by means that are allowed by the international laws of war, including, but not limited to Article 3 of the Geneva Convention of 1949, to wit:

Art. 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. (2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
Convention (IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, August 12, 1949

3) Do you believe its right for any military organization to hide behind civilians?

No. However, fighting an enemy who does so doesn't absolve military forces of the responsibility to avoid civilian casualties when their presence is known.

Now let me ask you to answer these questions:

1) What gives any nation state the right to exist?

2) What gives any ethnic/cultural group the right to have a nation state of its own?