World Affairs Board - View Single Post

troung · 04-16-2005, 17:24 PM

"And while their enemies are recieving only political pressure in the conflict I cannot condone increasing pressure against them on this matter. All or nothing is the only way I see it working. It took more than Israel to get to this point."

Umm cutting off aid doesn't mean they are going to fall apart tomorrow. It doesn't mean the Arabs woudl attack either. But if they lose that artificial edge they will go to the table. The only made peace with Egypt after the 1973 war when Egypt crossed the canal and inflicted big time (for Israel) losses on the IDF.

Sending them weapons and asking them to make peace is a joke. When America does not agree with a nations policy we hit them with sanctions (we did so to Pakistan, Greece, Indonesia, Cambodia, Chile and others), and yet we have not put any real sanctions on Israel. Holding up planes for a month (we did to Israel during the 1980s) is a joke compared to canceling deals like we did to Pakistan. Makes us a part of what they have done over there. They have made us look awful in that region. It's way past guilt by association.

Cutting off military/economic aid is not the same as taking away their guns. It would be to stop FMSing stuff and end the billions we give them a year (always found if funny how the same people who vote againist welfare have no problem giving out 5-6 billion a year). They would of course have to cut back their military as even now they can't afford it even with the aid. Cutting off the aid would be an important sign that we want them at the table. Once there is peace their the defense budgets there would drop anyways (some don't want peace for that very reason).

It's about time we either show we have the pants or admit we are taking it.

"Are you saying it is right? Otherwise I don't see your point."

I'm saying we do what we gotta do. Cutting off this dead wieght which doesn't help out should be a lot easier then the allies we ditched 30 years ago. The only thing stopping us from cutting aid is lobby groups buyign congressmen. As far as allies go they are actually quite useless.

"I think only free nations should have them for retaliatory purposes. If everyone has them, the only way to fight the tyrants of the world would be with nukes."

That would include Chavez and if the Ismalists which won elections in Algeria had not been kicked out by the right wing army after anulling the elections them as well....

"If it comes to a battle of survival, I doubt many of the major cities in the region would still be standing, after the point of desperation was reached."

It's wierd but this actually sounds like nuclear blackmail... we give them money to beat up their neighbors or they simply nuke their nieghbors...

04-16-2005, 17:24 PM	#27 (permalink)
troung A Self Important *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-03-03 Posts: 4,304 Country:	"And while their enemies are recieving only political pressure in the conflict I cannot condone increasing pressure against them on this matter. All or nothing is the only way I see it working. It took more than Israel to get to this point." Umm cutting off aid doesn't mean they are going to fall apart tomorrow. It doesn't mean the Arabs woudl attack either. But if they lose that artificial edge they will go to the table. The only made peace with Egypt after the 1973 war when Egypt crossed the canal and inflicted big time (for Israel) losses on the IDF. Sending them weapons and asking them to make peace is a joke. When America does not agree with a nations policy we hit them with sanctions (we did so to Pakistan, Greece, Indonesia, Cambodia, Chile and others), and yet we have not put any real sanctions on Israel. Holding up planes for a month (we did to Israel during the 1980s) is a joke compared to canceling deals like we did to Pakistan. Makes us a part of what they have done over there. They have made us look awful in that region. It's way past guilt by association. Cutting off military/economic aid is not the same as taking away their guns. It would be to stop FMSing stuff and end the billions we give them a year (always found if funny how the same people who vote againist welfare have no problem giving out 5-6 billion a year). They would of course have to cut back their military as even now they can't afford it even with the aid. Cutting off the aid would be an important sign that we want them at the table. Once there is peace their the defense budgets there would drop anyways (some don't want peace for that very reason). It's about time we either show we have the pants or admit we are taking it. "Are you saying it is right? Otherwise I don't see your point." I'm saying we do what we gotta do. Cutting off this dead wieght which doesn't help out should be a lot easier then the allies we ditched 30 years ago. The only thing stopping us from cutting aid is lobby groups buyign congressmen. As far as allies go they are actually quite useless. "I think only free nations should have them for retaliatory purposes. If everyone has them, the only way to fight the tyrants of the world would be with nukes." That would include Chavez and if the Ismalists which won elections in Algeria had not been kicked out by the right wing army after anulling the elections them as well.... "If it comes to a battle of survival, I doubt many of the major cities in the region would still be standing, after the point of desperation was reached." It's wierd but this actually sounds like nuclear blackmail... we give them money to beat up their neighbors or they simply nuke their nieghbors...