Israel: Strategic Asset or Strategic Liability?

**Cosmic** · 23 Dec 08,, 18:49

Originally Posted by GraniteForge

Well, no. Terrorism, generally, has been a problem in the US for more than a hundred years. New York City, for example, was hit by a series of terrorist bombings right before WW2. Despite what it seems from the vastly increased news coverage, terrorist incidents in the US are down substantially today, compared with the pre-war period.

I could not validate your information about pre-WWII bombing in US, so i am inclined to reject it as domestic elements and not particularly Islamic Jihadist. Also, during that timeframe there was lot a civil clashes due to depression and unemployment. I would not associate that with any modern day terror attack

Originally Posted by GraniteForge

Speaking only about Islamic-based terrorism, it is only the US relationship with Israel that creates the atmosphere in which such terrorism flourishes. If you could go back in time and remove the relationship, it is unlikely that such radical Islamic fundamentalists ever come into existence, never mind putting Americans at the top of their hit list.

As Ironduke, put we cannot rerun the history, and its baseless to assume the support of Israel is the cause. So far none of the statements terrorist agenda is on this issue. Deep down the terrorist motive is to convert "infidels", who are non-muslim to muslim. Thats their agenda, and has been for centuries. Also, countries like Sudan and parts of Africa, India, Indonesia, have long suffered islamic terrorism, none of these countries is even closest to be called a friend to Israel. Not to mention, India-Israel relationship has been improving in the recent past, but again the cause of terrorism there has got nothing to do with Israel.

Even in the recent times, London and Spain have experienced Jihadist terrorism. Neither are these countries in allied relationship with Israel.

**~~GraniteForge~~** · 23 Dec 08,, 19:52

Originally Posted by Cosmic

I could not validate your information about pre-WWII bombing in US, so i am inclined to reject it as domestic elements and not particularly Islamic Jihadist. Also, during that timeframe there was lot a civil clashes due to depression and unemployment. I would not associate that with any modern day terror attack

I never said they were Islamic or Jihadist, simply that terrorist bombings were once more common in the US than they have been recently.

While some of the bombings were certainly related to Labor, those motivated by political beliefs seem to have begun in the US in 1886. There was a very large bombing in Los Angeles in 1910. The Senate in Washington was bombed in 1915. There was a series of bombings in 1919, and a very large one in New York in 1920. The string of NY bombings I referred to actually took place between 1940 and 1956. Twenty-two bombs detonated, out of at least thirty-three placed in the string. Wikipedia has some links that you can use as a point of entry for further verification.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrori...ates#1900-1959
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_bombing

Originally Posted by Cosmic

As Ironduke, put we cannot rerun the history, and its baseless to assume the support of Israel is the cause. So far none of the statements terrorist agenda is on this issue. Deep down the terrorist motive is to convert "infidels", who are non-muslim to muslim. Thats their agenda, and has been for centuries.

On the contrary, I think its quite obvious that our massive support for Israel is directly behind the recent spate of Muslim-based terrorist activity aimed at the US and its allies. Your "infidel" theory just doesn't hold water, even by your own standards. You criticized me for citing terror bombings in the US over the last hundred years as being irrelevant to today's actions, then you try to base your own theory on some fanciful terrorist "agenda," that they have pursued "for centuries."

**Ironduke** · 23 Dec 08,, 20:46

Originally Posted by Cosmic

As Ironduke, put we cannot rerun the history, and its baseless to assume the support of Israel is the cause.

What I said was:

Well, we can't go back in time and re-run history so there's no way of knowing what would have happened if something were different.

I think unequivocal US support of Israeli policies has earned us a good measure of hatred from the Arab world. The question is whether 100% US support for Israel is worth the enmity of hundreds of millions of people. Are our national interests properly served by our current policy?

Herodotus · 23 Dec 08,, 21:27

Originally Posted by GraniteForge

I never said they were Islamic or Jihadist, simply that terrorist bombings were once more common in the US than they have been recently.

While some of the bombings were certainly related to Labor, those motivated by political beliefs seem to have begun in the US in 1886. There was a very large bombing in Los Angeles in 1910. The Senate in Washington was bombed in 1915. There was a series of bombings in 1919, and a very large one in New York in 1920. The string of NY bombings I referred to actually took place between 1940 and 1956. Twenty-two bombs detonated, out of at least thirty-three placed in the string. Wikipedia has some links that you can use as a point of entry for further verification.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrori...ates#1900-1959
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_bombing

That's not terrorism, that's the work of one lone disturbed man, for personal reasons. Terrorism has to have a political goal, conducted by a specific group,etc.

**~~Esteeler~~** · 23 Dec 08,, 22:38

Jews have done their share of terrorist acts have they not?

London and Spain have experienced Jihadist terrorism. Neither are these countries in allied relationship with Israel.

Not a very accurate statement.

**tankie** · 27 Dec 08,, 15:12

Dont know if this is the right place for this post

The UK has expressed "deep concern" after Israeli airstrikes killed more than 150 people in the Gaza Strip.
UK 'concern' over Israel airstrikes

The Foreign Office urged both Tel Aviv and Palestinian leaders to pursue "peaceful means" of reaching a settlement amid signs that tit-for-tat clashes were spiralling out of control.

"The only way to achieve lasting peace in Gaza is through peaceful means," a spokesman said.

"Whilst we understand Israeli's obligation to protect its population we urge maximum restraint to avert further civilian casualties. We also call on those in the Gaza Strip to immediately cease all acts against Israel."

The Israeli military said the strikes by F-16 bombers were in response to an escalation in rocket attacks from Gaza over recent days, since a truce between the two sides expired.

The targets had been "Hamas terror operatives", training camps and weaponry storage warehouses, according to a statement.

Gaza officials reported more than 150 dead and 200 others hurt a result of the strikes - the most intense on the territory for decades.

A White House spokesman said the United States "urges Israel to avoid civilian casualties as it targets Hamas in Gaza".

Aid agencies working in Gaza called on Israel, Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups to pull back from the brink of an all-out military confrontation.

The agencies - Oxfam, CARE International, CAFOD, Medico International and Diakonia - said military action would leave a humanitarian catastrophe in its wake.

????

**~~Esteeler~~** · 27 Dec 08,, 17:11

Russia said they were going to support them economically, send aid ect. Israels been trying to keep Russia out of the fight there but Putin and Medvedev want to meddle. Maybe the Israelis are going to push Hamas into the sea? Egypt opened it's border yesterday, they knew something was up. I get the impression that there are alot of civvies fleeing. I suspect that will be costly. What a bed the Israelis have made for themselves.

**outofshdw** · 27 Dec 08,, 17:25

Originally Posted by Herodotus

Israel has sold US military aircraft-designated for it-to China-a country the US does not readily send military technology to.

Do you really think that the Israelis sold anything to the Chinese without the US knowing about it, and providing at least tacit approval for the sale? The US used the Israelis to bolster China as a means of diverting Russia's attention from Europe during the Cold War. When the US finally changed its policies at the turn of the century, and asked the Israelis to halt arms cooperation with China, the Israelis did as they were told - unlike the UK, Italy, Canada, and other US allies who continued to "honor existing contracts" and supply military material to China. If the US government had really been opposed to Israeli arms shipments to China, they could have halted them in 1993, not in 2003.

The Israelis have been a US proxy for decades, supplying arms to parties that the US did not want to be directly associated with, and performing tasks that the US was either unwilling or unable to perform itself. US aid to Israel is not free. Aside from going to fund the US military-industrial complex (which produces all of those weapons supplied to Israel), the aid also comes with many strings attached. Supplying equipment to China - when the US wanted it to be done, and then halting those sales when the US reversed course - was but one such example.

**~~DRichards1968~~** · 01 Jan 09,, 18:18

Originally Posted by Ironduke

It's the title of a chapter of a required reading. I thought it may make an interesting topic here on WAB.

In the post-Cold War era, on the balance, has Israel proven to be a strategic asset or strategic liability to the United States? Do you feel that on the whole US interests coincide with those of Israel, or do you feel that they contradict them?

Israel is a 100% liability for the USA. Looking at it coldly, there is no reason for the USA to support Israel other than for sentimental reasons based on the Holocaust etc. Israel takes a lot from the USA and gives nothing back, other than headaches.

**~~DRichards1968~~** · 01 Jan 09,, 18:21

Originally Posted by Cosmic

I could not validate your information about pre-WWII bombing in US, so i am inclined to reject it as domestic elements and not particularly Islamic Jihadist. Also, during that timeframe there was lot a civil clashes due to depression and unemployment. I would not associate that with any modern day terror attack

As Ironduke, put we cannot rerun the history, and its baseless to assume the support of Israel is the cause. So far none of the statements terrorist agenda is on this issue. Deep down the terrorist motive is to convert "infidels", who are non-muslim to muslim. Thats their agenda, and has been for centuries. Also, countries like Sudan and parts of Africa, India, Indonesia, have long suffered islamic terrorism, none of these countries is even closest to be called a friend to Israel. Not to mention, India-Israel relationship has been improving in the recent past, but again the cause of terrorism there has got nothing to do with Israel.

Even in the recent times, London and Spain have experienced Jihadist terrorism. Neither are these countries in allied relationship with Israel.

Yes and no. The Al-Quaida terrorists are loons who will attack anyone in the West, but Hamas have a definite anti-Israeli agenda.

**~~DRichards1968~~** · 01 Jan 09,, 18:27

Originally Posted by GraniteForge

Israel has never been anything but a tremendous liability for the US. I am, and remain, baffled as to why the US has ever had anything but a distant observational relationship with that country.

Stop supporting Israel, the entire "Islamic fundamentalist" problem, Al Qaeda, etc., evaporates. Stop letting Israel in on sensitive information, the largest US security hole, military and industrial, disappears. Stop throwing all those billions of dollars at Israel every year, the US economy improves markedly.

I'm not baffled. The US has an incredibly powerful pro-Israeli lobby, mostly made up of rich and influential Jews, but also many from the old Anglo-Saxon elite. It's all tied up with the international banking system and the world economy. Too many vested interests want a strong Israel, because they feel that giving the oil rich Arabs an easy time would allow them to be too independent and uppity in their relations with the West. In that sense Israel is a 'guard dog' for Western interests in the Middle East. It's all about money, as always.

**~~DRichards1968~~** · 01 Jan 09,, 18:30

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Extremely misleading. Most Israeli defence purchases are funded by the Americans. Hence, the Americans are buying weapons to give to Israel. Israel is not spending her own money.

As for the aircraft carrier bit, that aircraft carrier was chickening out when the big bad bear came roaring in.

And let's not forget the Holocaust billions that Israel has received from Germany.

**~~DRichards1968~~** · 01 Jan 09,, 18:34

Originally Posted by Esteeler

I agree with Granite, Israeli actions cause a lot of problems. Iraeli policy in its part of the world towards Palastinians in my view is one of aparthied. Their expansionist policy on the West Bank, the blockade of Gaza, the complete overreaction in 2006 to Lebanon the evident corruption in its government tells me that Israel is certainly a liability.

There are many more, some stated above. I would also like to bring to light the Israeli extremists, the radical settlers. I think that Israels inability to control them is a big liability and a source of many problems. IMO they are terrorists and should be treated as such.

I woudn't go as far as you on this. The Arabs are no innocent angels, and are always quick to increase oil prices if they can get away with it. If I was an Israeli I would probably support a hard line towards the Arabs.

**HistoricalDavid** · 01 Jan 09,, 21:24

Originally Posted by DRichards1968

It's all tied up with the international banking system

Jews? Banking? Evil conspiracy?

***Alarm bells***

**drsambansal** · 02 Jan 09,, 04:46

Looking at fundamentally I beleive Israel & India are strategic allies of USA. The relationship can be exploited greatly but meanwhile US has to quit its diabolical policies of courting wrong states & then turning against them. Interests of Israel more so then of India are maturely against the muslim states. I am separating India here. That is because India too is afraid to go against the muslims due to their large numbers in India. But Israel has no such fear. Any Muslim state has to be doubted because even if they have a small number of its citizens radicalized, it is enough to become a terrorist state.

So relationship with Israel should be used to mutual advantage.

Dr Sam Bansal