Prometheus 6

LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

we WISH we had the kind of control over the Israelis.....our best effort is an emegency brake, not an accelerator.

It is however, a very real brake when put to the test.

It is however, a very real brake when put to the test.

And when was that? 

Israel's last invasion of Lebanon, circa 1982, when the IDF chased out the PLO. Reagan gave an ultimatum Begin to back off the IDF attack on Beirut and accept a cease-fire that permitted PLO forces to withdraw to Tunis. There are, I'm sure, less drastic examples but that's one where I've read multiple, reliable sources including the text of the diplomatic cable which was, in a highly unusual move, sent directly from the President personally.

IMHO the conflict with Hezbollah is simply a proxy war between Israel and Iran and Hezbollah being smashed is a good thing for not only Israel and the U.S. but Lebanon itself. Weakening the Labanese state however, as Israel is also doing, is a foolish and emotional/political reaction on the part of the Israelis.

As for the tail wagging the dog, which was my primary point, here are two guys with the appropriate military experience, the first a retired DIA Mideast Analyst.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2006/07/more_tribalism.html

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/johnrobb/2006/07/wrong_approach.html

Don't ever get it twisted. The Israelis have no love for the US. They love what their co-religionists have been able to wrest and build from the economic, political and cultural apparatus of the nation. Do you think Knesset/Mossad/rabbinic leaders are unaware of the close relationship between the US and the Nazis - and more specifically, Prescott Bush's advocacy of fascism or W's love affair with the Saudis? The Israelis are seldom pushed by the US to do ANYTHING they don't wish to do. After all, what is the counterweight that the US has over Israel? Please don't say it's the aid - because only a handful of American politicians stay in office for long without 1) getting those dollars through, 2)endorsing Israel right to exist, and 3) making the occasional trip to Jerusalem. The US is really not a "friend" of Israel or Jews. There have been eras of extended mutual cooperation, but much of this results from the effectiveness of US-based Jews in carving out a viable niche for their collective. So, Israel is really an Israeli military base - and the US (one could argue) is more likely to act on their behalf than the reverse.  

By way of example, Googling the term (with quotation marks) "US pressures Israel" yields 169 results - that's it.  Rarer than a blue diamond.

What IS the game Israel is playing? 

IMHO the conflict with Hezbollah is simply a proxy war between Israel and Iran

Coincidentally at the very time the Bush regime needs to pressure Iran.

I actually agree with John Robb, btw. 

Thanks for the reference to "Sic Semper Tyrannis". (I know this is orginally from Shakespeare's Julius Ceasar but I feel as if I'm quoting John Wilkes Booth everytime I write it out.) 

The post titled "Revenge Taken" is especially chilling and scary. A few months ago I tried telling my brother-in-law and his wife, both of whom are retired career Army officers, that the war in Iraq was having a disasterous effect on our military and they both just smiled and gave me the bullshit party line. I have no intentions of sharing that post with them but it makes me wonder just how many current and former military officers are able to comprehend what is happening to an institution they have devoted their lives to serving.

The rape and murder of the young girl and the murder of her family was covered up by the chain of command. Something is seriously amiss when sociopaths, not just Green, commit horrendous crimes that are then covered up by their officers. 

Israel, far and away, receives the largest share of U.S. foreign aid including military aid. If we don't have any control over its actions then what the f**k are we paying for?

" If we don't have any control over its actions then what the f**k are we paying for? "

Great question, actually.

The origins here were to preven a Mideast blow-up from escalating into WWIII between the superpowers and secondly, to assure the flow of oil to Europe and Japan by taking conventional war off the table between Egypt and Israel. 1972 and 1967 were too close to a nuke exchange for everyone's comfort.

American patronage of Israel allows the Arab governments to save face in front of their populations for not trying yet another, entirely hopeless, conventional war against Israel that they will lose badly. It allows Israeli leaders the breathing space or safety net to not take the logical but radically extreme military moves to assure their survival as a state without their alliance. Our alliance with Japan helps prevent a somewhat similar dynamic from developing between Japan-China-Korea-Taiwan-Vietnam who, if left to their own devices, would go to war with each other within 10 years

We buy a lower level of conflict - terrorism/guerilla warfare instead of regional state or nuclear war.

 

 

American patronage of Israel allows the Arab governments to save face in front of their populations for not trying yet another, entirely hopeless, conventional war against Israel that they will lose badly.

Yet the reason they would lose badly is American support. 

is one of maximizing survival for self and minimizing service to others...bottom line, the israelis understand the levers that allow them to gain resources from the US...they're not doing stoopid shit like african heads of state shelling out $9million to a phuckkin' lobbyist for a meeting with W. ain't no rocket science here...they're simply keeping it real about their challenges and their options.

"Yet the reason they would lose badly is American support"

No, the Arabs lost by lopsided margins in the wars *before* U.S. aid kicked in - the U.S. and Israel were not allies prior to the late Nixon administration.

Leftists who see Israelis as some kind of colonists or conservatives who see them as quasi-Americans are making the same error. Israelis are intensely nationalistic and are determined to survive as a state. Given a choice between surviving and American aid the Israelis will elect to survive and not try some kind of cohabitation joint-state with the Palestinians.

Short of that, we get a " veto" over their use of nuclear weapons or some other equally extreme act. That's the deal we have with Tel Aviv.

John Robb has an analysis on his other " professional" blog as well.

I don't always agree with John but I'm a big admirer of his - a nice ability to ignore politics and stick to military realities from the unconventional perspective. Lots of high tech knowledge too for the computer geek inclined, much of which goes over my head:

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2006/07/quote_the_conti.html

No, the Arabs lost by lopsided margins in the wars *before* U.S. aid kicked in - the U.S. and Israel were not allies prior to the late Nixon administration.

My point is, Israel cannot survive without external support. Right now that support comes from the USofA. Seriously, if the future Israelis wer just dropped off in the desert after WW !!, we wouldn't be having this discussion. 

---

 " If we don't have any control over its actions then what the f**k are we paying for? "

Great question, actually.

---

My question was meant rhetorically. The decision on the part of the victorious Allies to address a particularly virulent and, ultimately, horrific outbreak of historic European anti-Semitism by using its military superiority and its relationship with corrupt and non-elected Arab regimes to seize land in the Middle East and literally give it to the Zionists is what really lies at the heart of this conflict. It would have made far more sense, for example, to carve up parts of Germany, Austria and Poland and give those areas to the Jews than to insist that the Arabs should wash, dry and fold the Europeans' bloody laundry.

I think over time the importance of Israel as a bulwark against Soviet influence in the Middle East began to occupy the thinking of U.S. policy makers. Eisenhower and Kennedy, for example, were reluctant to cast our lot entirely with Israel. The wars in 1967 and 1972 helped to change U.S. policy and cause us to clasp the Israelis closely to our national bosom.

The current U.S. policy is not sustainable in the long run no matter how many times Israel is victorious in a conventional war with these corrupt and dysfunctional Arab regimes. The Palestinians cannot be endlessly played as pawns by these regimes and subjected to the continuous vicious racist treatment of the Israeli government without the tide turning at some point in the near future.

Part of that future will include the development of nuclear weapons by Iran and the overthrow of Musharaff in Pakistan. At that point, two nations that are implacably opposed to Israel will have nuclear weapons. The notion that other powers such as China and Russia will stand idly by and watch the U.S. and Israel sabotage their energy plans by destroying, for example, Iran's industrial infrastructure is absurd. China's desire for greatness and hegemonic domination in Asia cannot be dismissed or ignored.

Our Middle East policy is a Cold War relic and instead of us rethinking our strategy we are simply adding more weight to the superstructure. When the President of the United States says in response to the Israeli bombing and destruction of Lebanon's roads, airport etc. that nations have a right to defend themselves, we are hearing the mouthings, not of an honest broker seeking a reasonable policy, but of a partisan who does not care for or have any respect for Arab and Persian lives. September 11 was only the beginning of the blowback.

Israel  population 6. 3 million  GDP $ 154 billion

Egypt   population 78. 8 million  GDP $ 303 billion

Syria  population  18.8 million   GDP $ 72 billion

Barring drastic economic reform in the Arab world I'll bet on the Israelis ( who themselves could be far more productive with better economic policies).

You're assuming economics is the ultimate shaping force. You're also assuming the continuance of the current system. But at this point it gets all Platonic so I'll just say that's a reasonable conclusion given your assumptions.

 

Population of Middle East and North African Arab Countries -     458 million 

                                  Population of Israel -   7 million (including 1.4 million Muslims)

In the short run you might be right but I find it difficult to believe that 458 million people will continue to settle for oppressive, corrupt dysfunctional governments for much longer.  Time and demographics are against Israel (and the United States).

At one time Americans thought the Soviet Union would go on forever but it didn't last 70 years and its collapse was so swift and sudden that our intelligence agencies and Soviet scholars (like the current Secretary of State) were left in a state of befuddled wonderment.

I may be a hopeless romantic but I find it difficult not to believe that among nearly one -half billion people there does not exist here and there people who are eminently capable of reversing the current status quo.