The Jewish Lobby

Interestingly, the David and Goliath narrative is built upon the fallacy that Israel was supposedly outnumbered during the 1948 war. The Arabs weren't only outnumbered by over 10,000 men but also suffered from internal divisions and weren't able to capitalise on the June ceasefire as much as the Israelis. It wasn't really all that surprising that the Israelis won the war.

I also think that the idea of Palestinians as a whole approving of massacring children is kind of stereotypical. I've witnessed the greatest naivety and misguidedness amongst pro-Palestinian supporters, but advocating or approving of suicide bombing goes a bit too far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

Interestingly, the David and Goliath narrative is built upon the fallacy that Israel was supposedly outnumbered during the 1948 war. The Arabs weren't only outnumbered by over 10,000 men but also suffered from internal divisions and weren't able to capitalise on the June ceasefire as much as the Israelis. It wasn't really all that surprising that the Israelis won the war.

---

They knew that too, did they not? Yet they still refused to negotiate and approve the 1947 partition.

Quote:

---

I also think that the idea of Palestinians as a whole approving of massacring children is kind of stereotypical. I've witnessed the greatest naivety and misguidedness amongst pro-Palestinian supporters, but advocating or approving of suicide bombing goes a bit too far.

---

Both sides killed innocents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

I can't take this seriously

---

I see what you mean. Do you dispute that there is such a thing or that their lobby has a tremendous amount of power?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

I see what you mean. Do you dispute that there is such a thing or that their lobby has a tremendous amount of power?

---

That has nothing to do with it. The whole "WE MUST BREAK THE STRANGELHOLD OF TEH ZIONISTS!!!!!" sounds like some crazed person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

That has nothing to do with it. The whole "WE MUST BREAK THE STRANGELHOLD OF TEH ZIONISTS!!!!!" sounds like some crazed person.

---

Not to mention that the bulk of "teh zionist" support comes from the evangelicals.

Quote:

---

Both sides killed innocents.

---

Excuse me, why are you telling me this? Don't think I don't know.

Quote:

---

They knew that too, did they not? Yet they still refused to negotiate and approve the 1947 partition

---

I'm keeping this quote here so I can respond to it later. For the Arab side, I think it was largely a matter of principle: any surrender of Arab land was unacceptable. It's not that strange a position to take, really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

Excuse me, why are you telling me this? Don't think I don't know.

---

To make it clear that this wasn't a "good guys vs bad guys" kind of conflict.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

I'm keeping this quote here so I can respond to it later. For the Arab side, I think it was largely a matter of principle: any surrender of Arab land was unacceptable. It's not that strange a position to take, really.

---

Agreed. It is completely justified Islamic, if not Arabic, et al, moral code to recover "lost" land. It's not too different from anyone else's views, really. :shrug:

On Israel's value to the U.S.: Israel is our closest ideological partner and most stable country in that corner of the planet. We give them significant amounts of money and technology and put up with a lot of their b.s., but they give us access to a great deal of stuff that no other country in the region can. You don't ditch partners just because they come with baggage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Agreed. It is completely justified Islamic, if not Arabic, et al, moral code to recover "lost" land. It's not too different from anyone else's views, really. :shrug:

---

It was still a mistake imho. Their utter refusal to compromise had backfired in a very bad way. The "my way or the highway" kind of attitude usually results in the "highway".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

It was still a mistake imho. Their utter refusal to compromise had backfired in a very bad way. The "my way or the highway" kind of attitude usually results in the "highway".

---

Highways? Kinda like Roman roads?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Highways? Kinda like Roman roads?

---

Kinda, but not quite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

Kinda, but not quite.

---

Sorry. Should have typed "like the roads the Roman Empire built?", but I hope you understand the point. Instead of taking the highway, they build them.

But apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drone

But apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

---

Dont forget an awesome TW game.

Quote:

---

Agreed. It is completely justified Islamic, if not Arabic, et al, moral code to recover "lost" land. It's not too different from anyone else's views, really

---

Islam was used for anti-Jewish rhetoric against the Zionists, but it didn't play that large a role: the root of the conflict was between Arabs (not necessarily Muslims) and Jews. Of course, such people as Hajj Amin al-Husayni (who has also been portrayed as much more of an extremist than he actually was) used Islamic concepts to justify anti-Jewish raids and killings.

In any case, the fact that the Arab side was so divided would even further stress the point that this wasn't as clear-cut as Muslims versus Jews. In fact, there was no central command, there was not a clear strategy and the goals of King Abdullah of Transjordan were completely different from that of the Egyptians and the Iraqis, to the point that in the field, Abdullah's Arab Legion encountered more hostility from the Egyptians than from the Jews.

Quote:

---

To make it clear that this wasn't a "good guys vs bad guys" kind of conflict.

---

Thanks, I guess. We already know this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

That has nothing to do with it. The whole "WE MUST BREAK THE STRANGELHOLD OF TEH ZIONISTS!!!!!" sounds like some crazed person.

---

I think Zionists are crazy people. I'm not saying "the Jews". As it has been said, anyone who honestly advocates that the Jewish people own all "promised land" and can use biblical force to expand or keep it for all time is a lunatic. I don't care if the people advocating this are evangelicals, jews, neo-cons. What they are doing is insane and not based on any rational approach to foreign policy. We shouldn't allow them to drag our nation down with them.

Zionism is real, most people wouldn't deny that the proponents of "Zionism" hold a wildly disproportionate sway over our foreign policy in that region. We need to break the hold and replace it with a pragmatic and reasonable approach, similar to the approach that we attempt to use elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

...I think Zionists are crazy people...

---

That may be. Then again, maybe you have to be crazy in order to survive in a region where you're surrounded by crazies.

Maybe we are all a bit crazy. Maybe none of you exist and this is all in my mind.

I don't know why my mind created some of you people though, other than to torture myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

That may be. Then again, maybe you have to be crazy in order to survive in a region where you're surrounded by crazies.

---

Maybe you were crazy to move there in the first place, start killing people, and expect otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Maybe you were crazy to move there in the first place, start killing people, and expect otherwise.

---

Not if your other option was to stay and be exterminated by a bunch of other crazies.

"By the end of World War II, the Jewish population of Palestine had increased to 33% of the total population". The crazies were out of power by the time stuff hit the fan in the Levant. They violently took control of other peoples land after the Nazis had been wiped off the face of the earth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

"By the end of World War II, the Jewish population of Palestine had increased to 33% of the total population". The crazies were out of power by the time stuff hit the fan in the Levant. They violently took control of other peoples land after the Nazis had been wiped off the face of the earth.

---

What were they supposed to do, pack up and leave for war ravaged Europe? By then they had families, property, roots, children who were born in Palestine and most importantly they no longer had to depend on someone else's benevolence to ensure their safety. For the first time in almost two millenia they had a place where they could be themselves, where they didn't have to hide their identity and their culture, where they didn't have to blend in with the dominant population. If I were them, I'd fight to the death to preserve that, which incidentally they did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

What were they supposed to do, pack up and leave for war ravaged Europe? By then they had families, property, roots, children who were born in Palestine and most importantly they no longer had to depend on someone else's benevolence to ensure their safety. For the first time in almost two millenia they had a place where they could be themselves, where they didn't have to hide their identity and their culture, where they didn't have to blend in with the dominant population. If I were them, I'd fight to the death to preserve that, which incidentally they did.

---

They were depending on someone else's benevolence to ensure their safety - first France and then the US, and they smartly parlayed fundamentalist Christian sentiments and the Holocaust into a powerful lobby to keep the money and technology flowing from the latter. Israel is, by far, the largest recipient of US foreign aid. The Zionist State would not resemble its current, modern form without American patronage, and probably would not exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

They were depending on someone else's benevolence to ensure their safety - first France and then the US, and they smartly parlayed fundamentalist Christian sentiments and the Holocaust into a powerful lobby to keep the money and technology flowing from the latter. Israel is, by far, the largest recipient of US foreign aid. The Zionist State would not resemble its current, modern form without American patronage, and probably would not exist.

---

They had allies, sure, but by and large they carved out their own country using their own resources. Afterwards the French helped, then the Americans. While I'm no fan of Israel's policies I do take into account their struggle for survival. This just might be Nietzsche's case of becoming a monster after having fought monsters for a very long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

They were depending on someone else's benevolence to ensure their safety - first France and then the US, and they smartly parlayed fundamentalist Christian sentiments and the Holocaust into a powerful lobby to keep the money and technology flowing from the latter. Israel is, by far, the largest recipient of US foreign aid. The Zionist State would not resemble its current, modern form without American patronage, and probably would not exist.

---

Well of course they wouldn't exist in their current form if their history was different. They didn't need our help and didn't receive it until the 1970s; however, they did make good use of our AT missiles.

Bring me an alternative partner in the region. Jordan would be nice but a landlocked monarchy, with Israel on one border, isn't even close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

They had allies, sure, but by and large they carved out their own country using their own resources. Afterwards the French helped, then the Americans. While I'm no fan of Israel's policies I do take into account their struggle for survival. This just might be Nietzsche's case of becoming a monster after having fought monsters for a very long time.

---

QFT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Bring me an alternative partner in the region.

---

How about one we already have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

They were depending on someone else's benevolence to ensure their safety - first France and then the US, and they smartly parlayed fundamentalist Christian sentiments and the Holocaust into a powerful lobby to keep the money and technology flowing from the latter. Israel is, by far, the largest recipient of US foreign aid. The Zionist State would not resemble its current, modern form without American patronage, and probably would not exist.

---

How much of it is this and how much of it is realpolitik? I think you are seeing ghosts.


I can agree that Isreal often skirts its responsbility in what should be a partnership. I can agree that I am concerned in the direction in which Isreal is heading.

I am not ready, however, to head in the oppisite direction with reckless absandon based on inflamitory rhetoric

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

How about one we already have?

---

Because it is bordering on Islamic extremism, military coup, and involved in a bloody multi-decade civil war.

It makes the problems in Gaza look like a block party with fireworks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

...a country bordering on Islamic extremism and military coup involved in a bloody multi-decade civil war.

---

Sounds just like Israel however unfortunately for Israel it turns out Turkey is a far bigger and more important geo-political piece of the puzzle. Israel always tries not to annoy the Turks too much or effectively Israeli strategic policy on Syria/Lebanon falls in a heap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Sounds just like Israel however unfortunately for Israel it turns out Turkey is a far bigger and more important geo-political piece of the puzzle. Israel always tries not to annoy the Turks too much or effectively Israeli strategic policy on Syria/Lebanon falls in a heap.

---

Made a few edits. Israel is highly unlikely to turn against us in the next election. The same can't be said for the Turks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Made a few edits. Israel is highly unlikely to turn against us in the next election. The same can't be said for the Turks.

---

Thats because there emerging as a major player again on the world stage, there position is relatively unstable the US alliance keeps the Russians at bay and keeps the Caucasus regions conflict from hurting Turkey. (pretty much like in the 19th century)

The US is no fool they will not secure Israeli security by butting against Turkey and her interests.

Effectively the US will need/has a new relationship with Turkey becasue historically you never can make a move in the Mid East without either Turkey or Eygpt.

Thats why the Kurds have not been granted the own country by the Americans because Turkey would object and also because it would further strengthen Iran due to increased Shia control of Iraq.

US mid east policy can merrily run along without Israel so you shouldnt put too much stock on there importance. (hence all the fiery rhetoric about annihilation and the courting of US religious whack jobs)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

Re-posted as per Hooahguy's request.




I discussed this with him over Steam, but just to be explicitly clear, I am refering to Zionist Jews in this thread. As discussed in my original link (that I guess no one actually read; that's ok) Zionist Jews =/= Jews. They are a powerful minority within the greater, mainstream Jewish population in America. Their loyalty lies with Israel, despite their American citizenship, and they have no qualms about using American power to further Israel's interests.

---

When you speak of Zionism, you are speaking of the Jews. http://www.jewish-history.com/mlk_zionism.html

Quote:

---

During an appearance at Harvard University shortly before his death, a student stood up and asked King to address himself to the issue of Zionism. The question was clearly hostile. King responded, “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”

---

My irony detector just went off. You didn't link to that source to support that claim (anti-Zionism == anti-semitism), did you?

Quote:

---

Because it is bordering on Islamic extremism, military coup, and involved in a bloody multi-decade civil war.

---

None of that. I dislike Erdogan and his Islamic rhetoric, but bordering on Islamic extremism? Not really.

Military coups have occured in the past, but it's unlikely that it'll happen again. Who knows, though? This multi-decade civil war you're talking about concerns the Kurds, I assume. I think you're making it larger than the way it is in reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

None of that. I dislike Erdogan and his Islamic rhetoric, but bordering on Islamic extremism? Not really.

Military coups have occured in the past, but it's unlikely that it'll happen again. Who knows, though? This multi-decade civil war you're talking about concerns the Kurds, I assume. I think you're making it larger than the way it is in reality.

---

Yes, well, to an extent. Maybe it's extreme to say "extremism" but we can very much wake up to see Turkish national interest turn away from the U.S. It wasn't but a year or two go that there was a serious, ongoing discussion about another military coup.

Point is: Only trust the Turks if

1. You're in a combat zone.
2. You're fighting against the same enemy.
3. You're surrounded.
and
4. They're armed with knives; then it's game on. :knight:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

...4. They're armed with knives; then it's game on. :knight:

---

CEMAAT!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

On Israel's value to the U.S.: Israel is our closest ideological partner

---

I really don't see how Israel is even remotely comparable to the US in terms of ideology. Just look at all the instances where Israeli law sanctions, accomodates or promotes religious practices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

I really don't see how Israel is even remotely comparable to the US in terms of ideology. Just look at all the instances where Israeli law sanctions, accomodates or promotes religious practices.

---

And furthermore, where it fails to act.
Like for instance, a few months ago, bands of Orthodox Jews ran around violating Mosques and Palestinian property and the Israeli government did nothing.
As I mentioned in a different thread, around the same time as the majority of the Price Tag attacks, one guy in the (I think in NJ) threw rocks at a few Jewish businesses, a lot of world Jewry claimed it was the "second Kristallnacht." Yet when the Price Tag attacks became a regular thing, only Haaretz published it.
And even when there were arrests, it was swept under the rug.

Also there is an ignorance of the world in Israel, for a lack of better wording. Last February we went to an Israeli army base and met with an Israeli tank colonel, Bentzi Gruber. While we were there he gave us a speech on IDF moral code. Then he said two things that just struck me as totally ignorant:

1) The US military's policy in Iraq and Afghanistan was to level towns even if they had one terrorist in it, something which, to the best of my knowledge, is 100% false. This got me angry and made me lost 90% of the respect I had for him about 5 seconds before he made this comment.

2) The reason why so many US soldiers have PTSD is because they kill innocent people, and in the IDF they dont do that so they have a clean conscience.

What? Besides the fact that Iraq and Afghanistan are vastly different wars than what Israel has fought since 1973. The wars since then for Israel have been a few months long and very close to home, allowing for troops to not have to stay out in the field for too long, and not to mention. Yet for the US, troops are deployed for a year, sometimes more, in a combat zone, which includes ambushes and IEDs on a daily basis (depending on the area).
It doesnt take a genius to add up that the war experiences of US troops and Israeli troops are not the same.

Also, most Israeli soldiers are either behind a desk or are manning checkpoints for their entire draft service, very few actually see combat. Not exactly so dangerous.

EDIT: and the fact that this colonel was talking to a large group of teens who know nothing about the US military doesnt help either.

Quote:

---

Thats why the Kurds have not been granted the own country by the Americans because Turkey would object and also because it would further strengthen Iran due to increased Shia control of Iraq.

---

There already is a quasi-independent Kurdistan in Iraq. Also, Kurds living in Turkey are not Shi'ite. There's more at play here than just religious differences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

There already is a quasi-independent Kurdistan in Iraq. Also, Kurds living in Turkey are not Shi'ite. There's more at play here than just religious differences.

---

Yeah, but independent Kurdistan would further increase the proportion of shias in the remainder of Iraq.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

There already is a quasi-independent Kurdistan in Iraq. Also, Kurds living in Turkey are not Shi'ite. There's more at play here than just religious differences.

---

Indeed but quasi is not actual as we both know, also look at how delicately the US acts about it in relation to Turkey they even turn a blind eye to the odd border incursion.

And I wasnt stating that the Kurds were Shia but that essentially as RVG stated the Shia block in Iraq would increase in power even more if Kurdistan were declared. Also I dont believe that Iran bases her strategy on religion as such, but they do have a habit of couching it in those terms for public consumption. It's also easier for them obviously to convince a co-religionist to support Iran not this neccessarily means it would allow Iran to control Iraq.

Iran needs to help Syria and one way to to do this is to attempt to draw Iraq into it's fold, the US will not allow this and naturally keeps the Kurdish card underwraps as a potential block. At the minute it is not in the interests of the US probably due to Turkish and Sunnai Iraq basically not wanting to allow a full Kurdish republic of any kind. That does not mean that as the US turns it's eye on Iran that things wont take a life of there own.

If Turkey does not back the US with regard to the Iranian question in the future then the Kurds may be encouraged in order to block this Shia Arc that keeps the Saudis up at night. For the record I think the Shia Arc theory is a bit beyond the capability of an Iran that has basically drawn attention to itself.

Turkey has a problem in that any attempt to block Iran by destabilising her potentialy allies could unleash real Kurdish separitism in Iraq and Syria.
However at the same time they cant afford not to face off against Iran due to the potential nuclear problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

I really don't see how Israel is even remotely comparable to the US in terms of ideology. Just look at all the instances where Israeli law sanctions, accomodates or promotes religious practices.

---

Differences don't eliminate similarities.

That really begs the question what those similarities are. Without wanting to be pedantic, I'll point out that you said "closest" - meaning closer than the UK, Canada, Germany, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

That really begs the question what those similarities are. Without wanting to be pedantic, I'll point out that you said "closest" - meaning closer than the UK, Canada, Germany, etc.

---

Which is absurd - as the closest US ally is clearly the UK, politically, ideaologically and culturally.

I'm not even sure Israel is the closest ally in the region - Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Jordan all have things to recomend them, as does Bahrain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

That really begs the question what those similarities are. Without wanting to be pedantic, I'll point out that you said "closest" - meaning closer than the UK, Canada, Germany, etc.

---

No, sorry. I should have specified "in the region." Again, it's all relative and I'm not saying that I wouldn't like a bit of change, but I understand the context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Everyone always forgets Kuwait. That little country loves us. :creep:

---

Oh yeah. The Kuwaitis are reputedly even useful in a scrap.