Who is going to stand up to the US this time when it decides to invade Iran ?

moe_sizlak

purplengold wrote:

If what you say is true, and the USA dances to the Israeli tune and that the USA is a puppet of Israel, why is this? Why are Jews so influential in the USA?

i suspect you are trying to set me up for one of those gottcha moments , where i say something and it gives you an openning to accuse me of being anti semetic
i dont believe i am anti semetic but i do believe that it is pecular that one tiny country with a population of under 10 million has more clout with the only superpower on earth than any other country , the uk,s so called special relationship with uncle sam pales into comparrison with that of israel

the israely lobby is the 2nd biggest in washington after the pro gun lobby
there are allegedly 40 million americans of irish descent , who,s vote do you think is more important , irish americans or jewish americans , theese are just a few examples of israels disproportionate influence on the u.s goverment , the rest are well documented , why is this so , to try and answer such a question could leave one vulnerable to being labelled , many in the usa have tried to open dialogue on this subject , many have suggested that perhaps the israely lobby is too influential , most have been swiftly silenced by the obnoxious anti semite label , if there is to be an open debate in here on the subject of israels influence on u.s foreign policy then i would hope that those who take part in such a debate refrain from using tired old cliches
while we may not want any robert fisks , we certainly dont want any eoghan harris,s either

OS119

moe_sizlak wrote:

i suspect you are trying to set me up for one of those gottcha moments , where i say something and it gives you an openning to accuse me of being anti semetic
i dont believe i am anti semetic but i do believe that it is pecular that one tiny country with a population of under 10 million has more clout with the only superpower on earth than any other country , the uk,s so called special relationship with uncle sam pales into comparrison with that of israel

i think you are mistaken, the US and Israel stick close because Israel is useful to the US within its Mid East policies and the US is useful to Israel because it needs a patron.

there is no love lost between the countries.

unlike the UK and US there is no nuclear co-operation. the UK is the only country in the world the US partners on Nuclear weapons systems.

the UK gets direct access to the feed of every US satellite, HUMINT, ELINT, SIGINT sources, and all the SOSUS networks and overhead imagery that the US produces, the UK provides the same access to the US. Israel doesn't get a sniff.

Israel got kicked out of the JSF program because they consistantly flog High-grade US tech to 'unfriendly powers' like China, the UK is a level one partner - the only level one partner.

the US regularly discvovers Israeli intelligence operations acting against US interests in the US, that's not the case with the UK.

US and Isreali politics may co-incide, but in no way do the Israeli's have a closer relationship to the US and the UK does.

purple'n'gold

OS119 wrote:

i think you are mistaken, the US and Israel stick close because Israel is useful to the US within its Mid East policies and the US is useful to Israel because it needs a patron.

there is no love lost between the countries.

unlike the UK and US there is no nuclear co-operation. the UK is the only country in the world the US partners on Nuclear weapons systems.

the UK gets direct access to the feed of every US satellite, HUMINT, ELINT, SIGINT sources, and all the SOSUS networks and overhead imagery that the US produces, the UK provides the same access to the US. Israel doesn't get a sniff.

Israel got kicked out of the JSF program because they consistantly flog High-grade US tech to 'unfriendly powers' like China, the UK is a level one partner - the only level one partner.

the US regularly discvovers Israeli intelligence operations acting against US interests in the US, that's not the case with the UK.

US and Isreali politics may co-incide, but in no way do the Israeli's have a closer relationship to the US and the UK does.

I broadly agree with what you are saying especially about the USA and the UK. But, it doesn’t answer my question as to why the USA gives HUGE amounts of money to Israel. And I mean billions upon billions of dollars. And even if Israeli agents are caught engaged in espionage against the USA (as has happened) the money river is not even interrupted. They seem to have a completely disproportionate amount of influence with every US administration.

karen3212

purplengold wrote:

I broadly agree with what you are saying especially about the USA and the UK. But, it doesn’t answer my question as to why the USA gives HUGE amounts of money to Israel. And I mean billions upon billions of dollars. And even if Israeli agents are caught engaged in espionage against the USA (as has happened) the money river is not even interrupted. They seem to have a completely disproportionate amount of influence with every US administration.

The US must be getting something in return right. Perhaps Israelis are dying to hold onto Jerusalem which the extremely right wing Christians in the US must be in Jewish hands when that Armageddon comes. Or Israelis are dying keeping the Arabs busy while the oil routes out of the Mid East stay open. I might be completely wrong.

Kev_85

The jew has been like this for hundreds of years. It's in their DNA.

oscarBravo

That little gem earned Kev 85 a siteban. Let's keep it civilised, ta.

moe_sizlak

OS119 wrote:

i think you are mistaken, the US and Israel stick close because Israel is useful to the US within its Mid East policies and the US is useful to Israel because it needs a patron.

there is no love lost between the countries.

unlike the UK and US there is no nuclear co-operation. the UK is the only country in the world the US partners on Nuclear weapons systems.

the UK gets direct access to the feed of every US satellite, HUMINT, ELINT, SIGINT sources, and all the SOSUS networks and overhead imagery that the US produces, the UK provides the same access to the US. Israel doesn't get a sniff.

Israel got kicked out of the JSF program because they consistantly flog High-grade US tech to 'unfriendly powers' like China, the UK is a level one partner - the only level one partner.

the US regularly discvovers Israeli intelligence operations acting against US interests in the US, that's not the case with the UK.

US and Isreali politics may co-incide, but in no way do the Israeli's have a closer relationship to the US and the UK does.

you seem well informed on various pacts between the usa and uk , deals that i was not aware of but i disagree with you none the less
the uk lent its support to americas war on terror in afghanistan and the war in iraq without hesitation , they were and are a loyal allie to the usa yet durring last yrs decimation of lebannon by israel which the usa fully supported , the uk were pretty scathing in there condemnation of what the israelis were doing , they make this clear to the usa yet were let know pretty quickly where americas loyalty lay
while tony blair was prime minister durring pres bushes tennor , he made a lot of effort considerring the limited clout he had to try and gain a state for the pallestinians and secure peace in general between arab and israeli
he was constantly frustrated by the bush whitehouse refusal to in anyway take a tougher line with the israelis

the britts see the special relationship right now as pretty one way , the uk doesnt seem to get much in return from uncle sam , its a very different story as regards washingtons relationship with israel

israels security is a bigger priority to the usa than the security of any other nation on earth , name another country for which every single weapon they possess is paid for by the american tax payer , you never hear american politicians make comments like when im president my number one priority in asia is to protect burma , yet the exact comment is made about israel as regards the mid east

some will say they make theese comments because israel is always under threat of extinction , of course israels impending demise has always been over blown , no more so than by the israelis who have done extrmley well out of it , we hear things like iran will wipe israel off the map when in fact israel being as trigger happy as they are and with the 5th biggest army on earth and and possessing a millitary capability 10 times that of all the other mid east countrys put togetherer , are far more likely to wipe iran of the map

dont get me wrong , im not fan of the islamic states of the mid east and there backward cultures but the insanely disproportionate level of influence israel has with the usa is in my mind one if not thee main cause of tension in the mid east , the usa would regain a lot of its status in the world were it to have a fresh look at its relationship with israel or more importantly its relationship with the israely lobby in washington

Mr.Micro

I tend to agree that Israel has a huge influence on US middle east policy.ISRAEL is like the out of control partner at times eg when it invaded Lebanon last year and caused destruction to civilian infrastructure ( defined as war crime if another country did it) ,yet the US refused to even condemn the whole invasion or even any part of it.Bizarre.

Then again the US and Israel came up with this policy of attacking perceived enemies before they attack you .Its like the film Minority Report where people who are going to commit a crime in the future are taken out in advance . Such a policy does not belong in the civilized world ( I use the term civilized loosely ,as mankind will never be civilized).Nobody is right all the time but the US acts like it is, and its partners abuse their position knowing that nothing will happen as big brother will back them up. Such onesidedness will never resolve the trouble in the Middle East. Finally ,adding a war monger like Blair to act as a peace envoy that is just Hollywood and disgusting .

Manic Moran

Mr.Micro wrote:

Then again the US and Israel came up with this policy of attacking perceived enemies before they attack you .Its like the film Minority Report where people who are going to commit a crime in the future are taken out in advance. Such a policy does not belong in the civilized world ( I use the term civilized loosely ,as mankind will never be civilized).

If you are in the position of weakness on the defense, as Israel would have been in 1967, then it makes a lot of sense to not wait for the opposition to fire the first shot.

NTM

djpbarry

moe sizlak wrote:

im not fan of the islamic states of the mid east and there backward cultures

Careful now…

Manic Moran wrote:

If you are in the position of weakness on the defense, as Israel would have been in 1967, then it makes a lot of sense to not wait for the opposition to fire the first shot.

But that is assuming that someone is going to fire upon you? Besides, Israel is in a much stronger state than it was 40 years ago – well able to defend itself.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

yeah, saddam should have nuked the us wihle he had the chance.

Mr.Micro

Manic Moran wrote: »

If you are in the position of weakness on the defense, as Israel would have been in 1967, then it makes a lot of sense to not wait for the opposition to fire the first shot.

NTM

Thats as maybe, but it does away with the rationale that we all have to live with in our daily lives. ie law and order ,trial , jury . and tolerance etc . If an individual lived near people who he or she perceived that these people were a threat ,and decided to take them out .What then ? The harsh reality and penalty of the law intervenes ,or off to the mental hospital.

Such constraints or logic are not applicable when it comes to the US partners.Nobody in the real world could get away with it , and not even a proper body to keep such actions in check .The only thing is sooner or later such maverick actions may be a step too far that will have far reaching consequences .

Manic Moran

Mr.Micro wrote: »

. If an individual lived near people who he or she perceived that these people were a threat ,and decided to take them out .What then ?

Put it this way: I don't need to wait for someone to actually pull the trigger when aiming a firearm at me before I can shoot them in this country.

Whilst 99% of the time, pre-emptive action is not appropriate, I think an all-encompassing prohibition is equally unfair. There will sometimes be situations where you just have to shoot first.

NTM

moe_sizlak

Manic Moran wrote: »

Put it this way: I don't need to wait for someone to actually pull the trigger when aiming a firearm at me before I can shoot them in this country.

Whilst 99% of the time, pre-emptive action is not appropriate, I think an all-encompassing prohibition is equally unfair. There will sometimes be situations where you just have to shoot first.

NTM[/QUOT

pulling the trigger when someone is aiming at you is one thing , exaggertatting a threat that isnt even there , for example the usa,s claim that iraq had wmd,s and there latest claim along with israel that iran has a nuke ( independant nuclear bodys have stated there a decade away from having the means to make and deliver one) is an entirely different scenario

Manic Moran

moe_sizlak wrote: »

pulling the trigger when someone is aiming at you is one thing

Right. But the ealier statement of

Then again the US and Israel came up with this policy of attacking perceived enemies before they attack you

appears to advocate a policy of at all costs to not attack first.

NTM

fly_agaric

OS119 wrote: »

the UK gets direct access to the feed of every US satellite, HUMINT, ELINT, SIGINT sources, and all the SOSUS networks and overhead imagery that the US produces, the UK provides the same access to the US. Israel doesn't get a sniff.

How do you know what the US "has" let alone how much of it the UK gets access to compared to Israel?:D

Mr.Micro

Manic Moran wrote: »

Put it this way: I don't need to wait for someone to actually pull the trigger when aiming a firearm at me before I can shoot them in this country.

Whilst 99% of the time, pre-emptive action is not appropriate, I think an all-encompassing prohibition is equally unfair. There will sometimes be situations where you just have to shoot first.

NTM

Yes the gun situation in the US appears to allow for a gun threat which in effect would be reasonable to defend onself.However ,here in Ireland and in the UK people have been prosecuted for defending themselves when intruders invaded their homes ,as one or more of the invaders were killed and then it was the perpetrator who became the victim.So we cannot act in the same way in this part of the world .

I realize the Israel situation is extremely difficult for it as a nation to exist with all the hostility around it ,but there are, at times, daily and weekly incursions into Palestine with often deliberate destruction of the infrastructure and housing. This again in my opinion is pre emptive and without penalty from big brother. It is never going to solve the problem but feed each generation with hate .It appears so onsided to us in the West .

Patriot_man

We should help the Iranians against the enemy.

Manic Moran

Patriot_man wrote: »

We should help the Iranians against the enemy.

This ought to be entertaining. How, exactly?

NTM

purple'n'gold

Joseph Palmi: You know, we Italians have our families and the church, the Irish have the homeland, the Jews their tradition, the **** their music. What do you guys have?
Edward Wilson: We have the United States of America. The rest of you are just visiting.

That’s a quote from the recent film “The good shepherd”
I asked on this thread why people think that the Jews have so much clout in the USA.( By the way I am not anti Semitic, so lets establish that immediately.) influence, away and above what it should actually be. Here’s my opinion, they have this influence because the Americans allow them to have it. It suits the Americans to have the Middle East on the boil all the time. They have used Israel for this purpose since its foundation. The reason, pure and simple, oil. America uses Israel as its proxy and it gives them a reason to have a presence in the Middle East. They have made a few mistakes over the years of course, (as America does) allowing the non stop persecution of the Palestinians was bad policy, it probably led in no small way to 9/11. But the Americans just used that as an excuse to invade Iraq and further secure the oil supplies. It’s not working out very well at the moment. But they are still in Iraq and sitting on the oil.

the_syco

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I realize the Israel situation is extremely difficult for it as a nation to exist with all the hostility around it ,but there are, at times, daily and weekly incursions into Palestine with often deliberate destruction of the infrastructure and housing. This again in my opinion is pre emptive and without penalty from big brother. It is never going to solve the problem but feed each generation with hate .It appears so onsided to us in the West .

Israel is in this mindset, as they keep getting bombed. GW1, Saddam launched some scuds at them. Recently, their neighbours try to blow them up. When they get bombed, they attack back. But as we usually only hear about Israel attacking back, we assume Israel are the bad guys.

independant nuclear bodys have stated there a decade away from having the means to make and deliver one

Says a group in the US. Some of the military in Russia says Iran already has one. Who to believe, I'm unsure.

moe_sizlak

the_syco wrote: »

Israel is in this mindset, as they keep getting bombed. GW1, Saddam launched some scuds at them. Recently, their neighbours try to blow them up. When they get bombed, they attack back. But as we usually only hear about Israel attacking back, we assume Israel are the bad guys.


Says a group in the US. Some of the military in Russia says Iran already has one. Who to believe, I'm unsure.

you claim we and presumably you mean we here in ireland and europe only hear about the israelis doing the attacking , i dont agree but fair enough , in the usa however the complete opposite is the case , they never ever do any reporting on israeli incursion into pallestine and subsequent bulldozing of houses and other forms of collective punishment , in the u.s media , the israelis are always and i mean always potrayed as being victims of hate filled anti semetic arabs and as being nothing but a benign force and most importantly an allie of the usa

Mr.Micro

the_syco wrote: »

Israel is in this mindset, as they keep getting bombed. GW1, Saddam launched some scuds at them. Recently, their neighbours try to blow them up. When they get bombed, they attack back. But as we usually only hear about Israel attacking back, we assume Israel are the bad guys.


Yes I know that Saddam was a rogue element but Israeli reaction is extreme everytime .We still do not really know why Syria was attacked some weeks ago.Is its policy of attacking perceived threats working .The truth never comes out .

djpbarry

the_syco wrote:

Recently, their neighbours try to blow them up. When they get bombed, they attack back. But as we usually only hear about Israel attacking back, we assume Israel are the bad guys.

Which neighbours are you referring to?

Israel's attacks are often unjustified, or, disproportionate. For example, Hezbollah capture an Israeli soldier and Lebanon gets sent back to the Stone Age. I think their title of "bad guys" in that conflict was justified.

Manic Moran

wrote:

We still do not really know why Syria was attacked some weeks ago.

Attacked? What attack? Syria denies any attack.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/11/world/middleeast/11syria.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Well, at least it did yesterday. They might change again tomorrow.

For example, Hezbollah capture an Israeli soldier and Lebanon gets sent back to the Stone Age. I think their title of "bad guys" in that conflict was justified

Perhaps they should have had a letter-writing campaign?

NTM

djpbarry

Manic Moran wrote:

Perhaps they should have had a letter-writing campaign?

NTM

If the IRA captured a British soldier and held him/her captive in say, Dundalk, do you think the British government would be justified in sending in the RAF to level Ireland? Didn't think so. So why is it ok for Israel to do exactly that to Lebanon? Hezbollah represent a small minority of the Lebanese people, in the same way that Sinn Féin represents a small minority of the Irish people. I am not defending the actions of Hezbollah, but it should be remembered that they are a terrorist organisation, a seperate entity to Lebanon.

moe_sizlak

israel most likely attacked and destroyed lebbanon so as to send a stong message to a stong nation in the region , i.e iran , lebannon was deemed by israel and the usa to be elligible for sacrafice to project israels might to stronger forces

purple'n'gold

The USA could have stopped the destruction of Lebanon with a click of their fingers. They choose not to, it suited them to destroy Lebanon (and it was the USA that destroyed Lebanon, they used Israel as their tool). It kept the pot boiling and scared the likes of Saudi Arabia.

Manic Moran

djpbarry wrote: »

I am not defending the actions of Hezbollah, but it should be remembered that they are a terrorist organisation, a seperate entity to Lebanon.

Yes and no. If memory serves, Hezbollah at the time was the de-facto government of a good portion of Southern Lebanon, and the central Lebanese government never seemed inclined to do anything about it. This is a different situation to Dundalk, which is generally speaking under the control of Dublin. Though of course we can never know for sure, I'm inclined to think that if the Sinora government had not taken the lazy way out and had actually taken an interest in its Souther frontier, even if they were not successful in stopping that particular Hezbollah assault, the Israeli retaliation would have not been as extensive across the country as it would have been.

NTM

djpbarry

Manic Moran wrote:

If memory serves, Hezbollah at the time was the de-facto government of a good portion of Southern Lebanon, and the central Lebanese government never seemed inclined to do anything about it.

Whether the Lebanese army had the resources to secure southern Lebanon is doubtful, considering the IDF failed to do so. Besides, areas such as Beirut and Baalbeck, both of which are a considerable distance from the Israeli border, were heavily targeted by the Israeli Air Force.