$30bn in US aid signed over to Israel -on rtenews site

Morlar

$30bn in US aid signed over to Israel
Thursday, 16 August 2007 16:05

The US has signed a $30bn deal with Israel for military funding over next ten years, which is a 25% increase over previous years.

At a signing ceremony in Jerusalem, US Under Secretary of State, Nicholas Burns, pledged the US would help Israel maintain a military advantage over its regional foes.

Mr Burns said the US considers the defence aid funding to be an investment in long-term peace.

The package was unveiled by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in July.

Is part of a new military pact with US allies in the region aimed at countering the 'negative influences' of al-Qaeda, Lebanon's Hezbollah militant group and enemies in Iran and Syria.


Just came across this on the rtenews site and wondering what are peoples thoughts on this.

$30,000,000,000.00 is a staggering amount of money to spend on arms for a country that small especially considering that this is in addition to its exsisting arsenal which includes a state of the art air force, nuclear capability, armoured tanks/vehicles, access to satelite and unmanned reconnaissance drones and so on.

My own view is that making israel the most well armed nation on earth (or one of them) provides a dis-incentive for making peace with its neighbours. It reinforces the siege mentality which leads to distrust of its Arabs neighbours in general. I think it will have the opposite effect from the intended and further destabilise the region. Anyone else have any thoughts on this ? Good idea/bad idea and why ?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0816/israel.html

El Stuntman

they need the weaponry imo when you look at the crescent of lunatics surrounding them

Morlar

El Stuntman wrote:

they need the weaponry imo when you look at the crescent of lunatics surrounding them

If by 'crescent of lunatics' you mean islamic fundamentalists - then yes there are many in that region ready to attack them - part of the reason for their existence is the continued actions of the state of israel imo (though that is another thread).

The point I am making is that there are also many moderate arab nations in the region - and some genuine grievances which will remain un-addressed.

Do you think giving israel $30,000,000,000.00 to spend militarily (in addition to the countries own defence budget - this is hardly a 3rd world country economically) is a good idea ? Do you think it could discourage any attempts at or any kind of impetus for peace with its neighbours ?

Benedict XVI

El Stuntman wrote:

they need the weaponry imo when you look at the crescent of lunatics surrounding them

Totally agree,

When the people in the area governed by the Palestinian Authority elect a group (Hamas) who are willing to use violence against Israel then I reckon Israel need all the help they can get.

it's good news.

sovtek

Benedict XVI wrote:

Totally agree,

When the people in the area governed by the Palestinian Authority elect a group (Hamas) who are willing to use violence against Israel then I reckon Israel need all the help they can get.

it's good news.

Actually Hamas have called for a cease fire since they've come into power. So much for democracy and all...as long as they vote for who "we" want.

mike65

Hezzbollah are tooling up again it seems according to BBC radio report this morning.

Anyway 30 billion over 10 years is'nt so huge. Barely keep Halliburton ticking over.

Mike.

Morlar

mike65 wrote:

Hezzbollah are tooling up again it seems according to BBC radio report this morning.

Anyway 30 billion over 10 years is'nt so huge. Barely keep Halliburton ticking over.

Mike.

Would you take that view if the 30bn was in the hands of hezbollah ?

I think if it were it would have an effect on their approach to a negotiating position, likewise I think it will have a detrimental affect on the israeli approach. Its not like they were running out of bullets without the $30 billion.

InFront

Anyway 30 billion over 10 years is'nt so huge. Barely keep Halliburton ticking over.

Isn't so huge? Another three billion euro per year for a particularly dumb army covering an area smaller than Munster? (and incidentally with an aim whose margin of error seems to cover a similar area)

Of course Palestinians are arming up.

purple'n'gold

Nothing unusual or strange about the USA giving Israel vast amounts of money for arms. And turn a blind eye when Palestinians are tortured and murdered .When Israel says jump the USA says, how high? And the stupid Americans wonder why 9/11 happened.

Dirk Gently

The 2nd, 34th and 41st of the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition cover this.....

2. The best deal is the one that brings the most profit

34. War is good for business

41. Profit is its own reward.

They are of course selling weapons to neighbouring countries who are worried they might not be able to keep up, not Iran however for some reason.

BostonB

clown bag wrote:

...
They are of course selling weapons to neighbouring countries who are worried they might not be able to keep up, not Iran however for some reason.

Not any more anyway.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0077.shtml

Dirk Gently

BostonB wrote:

Not any more anyway.

You'd be surprised who supplied who with conventional and chemical weapons and who trained which organisations over the years and who encouraged and supported their use. Well maybe you wouldn't be surprised. Yesterdays ally is todays terrorist and all that.

Sesshoumaru

This is great news. Israel is surrounded by terrorist lunatics from the dark ages. This will help ensure Israels survival over the next decade.

El Stuntman

purplengold wrote:

Nothing unusual or strange about the USA giving Israel vast amounts of money for arms. And turn a blind eye when Palestinians are tortured and murdered .When Israel says jump the USA says, how high? And the stupid Americans wonder why 9/11 happened.

here's a question: why did Madrid happen then?

brianthebard

Because Spain aided the US in their war? Because Spain has a fraught relationship with Islam and has had since the 1400s? I'm sure there's plenty of reasons, pick one from a hat.
Imo, the money would be better spent by *shock* investing in the poorer countries that border Israel. Time and time again we have seen that it is the poorer nations that will turn to violence and war, while those who are becoming richer will more towards moderatism. But instead of heeding this fact (I think its fact at any rate) America decides to keep arming a dangerous, neurotic nation.

spank_inferno

I'm a little confused by the tone of the RTE article?

It refers to being bot "aid" and a military deal.
I'm sure America hasnt handed over 30 billion worth of hardware as a freebie.
I think the word aid is wrong. Its just a business deal surely.
Israel is also a good customer of the french for military goods.
Yet when such deals are done are the french deemed as providing "aid"

If ireland purchased a few APC's and a new helicoptor from the french would that too be "aid" or a sale.

The Saint

spank_inferno wrote:

I'm a little confused by the tone of the RTE article?

It refers to being bot "aid" and a military deal.
I'm sure America hasnt handed over 30 billion worth of hardware as a freebie.
I think the word aid is wrong. Its just a business deal surely.
Israel is also a good customer of the french for military goods.
Yet when such deals are done are the french deemed as providing "aid"

If ireland purchased a few APC's and a new helicoptor from the french would that too be "aid" or a sale.

The US gives Israel military aid through loans and credits. However, the Israelis have to spend most of the money on equipment from US arms companies and is therefore an indirect subsidy to US weapons manufacturers (military keynesianism). As for as I'm aware the US usually writes off most of these debts anyway so it's largely free money. The French don't provide aid. They just sell stuff to Israel.

As for the increase in aid; I think it's pointless and a waste of money. They are only getting it to appease them as Saudi Arabia are getting an increase in aid to counter balance Iran. Israel has the most advanced military in the region by a long shot and no other country (or even group of countries) could defeat them. Most of the countries in the region are also seeking peace with Israel (including Saudi Arabia) making it an ever stranger decision. Maybe if more effort was put in on that front then there would be no need for such aid increases and it would save the American tax payers money. I'm surprised Egypt isn't giving out about this and looking for increased military aid too given the Camp David Accords .

RedPlanet

USA flooding the region with arms, how nice.
Since they are willing to throw so many billions on machinations of war, how much "aid" are they throwing towards peace?

OS119

The Saint wrote:

The US gives Israel military aid through loans and credits. However, the Israelis have to spend most of the money on equipment from US arms companies and is therefore an indirect subsidy to US weapons manufacturers (military keynesianism). As for as I'm aware the US usually writes off most of these debts anyway so it's largely free money. The French don't provide aid. They just sell stuff to Israel.
QUOTE]

the money - or credits - the US gives to Israel can only be used to buy US built or designed systems, if the Israelis wish to buy some other system - including their own, they have to spend their own money.

this creates a rather interesting - and maccabre - paradox.

lots of people moan - unsurprisingly - about the Israeli use of MLRS systems to deliver sub-munitions into Lebannon when this system has a failure rate of between 10 - 30%, now then, because of this 'buy American and its free, buy Israeli and it costs' issue with the US credits,the Israeli Army uses a US sub-munition in its MLRS that has the failure rate mentioned above - however the Israelis themselves manufacture an MLRS sub-munition with a failure rate of between 3 and 5% that the UK and various other countries use instead of the US designed/manufactured version.

interestingly, the Saudi deal will pay for the Israeli subsidy. funny that.

The Saint

OS119 wrote:

the money - or credits - the US gives to Israel can only be used to buy US built or designed systems, if the Israelis wish to buy some other system - including their own, they have to spend their own money.

I think it's around 75% that has to be spent on US arms. They can use the other 25% elsewhere (usually internally I think).