Soccer Dad

Israel, like anyone else receiving a government handout (section-8ers, charities,..etc) has to do what is required to please its benefactor. If Israel does not like America's terms they can always go without my tax dollars.

Israel, like anyone else receiving a government handout (section-8ers, charities,..etc) has to do what is required to please its benefactor.

That of course is not strictly true--look at Egypt, which has managed very nicely, thank you, to ignore pressures to democratize.

One can easily make the case that the US ges something in return from Israel. Know of anyone who would even want to try to make the case for Egypt?

In any case, I agree--Israel would be better of not having to rely on the US, and I believe the vast majority of Israelis agree.

That will provide the US with extra dollars to spend on the Palestinian Authority--another entity that the US clearly has wrapped around her little finger.

Egypt has provided the US with quite a bit over the years. They supplied Soviet weapons that were funneled to Afghanistan. Egyptian troops served in Bosnia, the 1st Gulf War, and Somalia.

Even if that was not true, the fact that one of Israel's moochers off the American teat gets a free ride does not change the fact that Israel is obligated to keep its benefactor happy.

First--Can you give a link for Egypt's contributions--I'd like to look into that.

Second--How is Egypt "one of Israel's moochers"

Third--if you are going to suggest that that Egypt's 'contributions' in any way are a mitigating factor, then why not in the case of Israel?

Fourth--Moocher implies a free ride. How does that description fit Israel?

Fifth--I already agreed that Israel would prefer to not have the apron strings. Can you say the same about Egypt

Sixth--You did not mention the one true moocher: the Palestinian Arabs. Can you describe anything that Abbas and the PA have provided in return for the money they are receiving...and wasting?

True Bruce, one should never underestimate...Hadassah. :-)

Not so wise, Israel does not "mooch" off of America. The fact is that they receive loans to buy American military equipment. Furthermore the U.S. receives much intelligence from Israel about the region. On the other hand the U.S. receives nothing in return from Egypt. This is typical of scum such as yourself who constantly complain about U.S. loans to Israel but have no complaints about money we give to Egypt and the terrorist PA.
Contrary to popular myth, Israel has not bankrupted the U.S.
http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=2185

They could let Norman Finkelstein back in the country.

ISRAEL should stop using US tax money to build illegal settlements in the West Bank.

It's immoral, wrong, dishonest, and illegal.

Daled,

First- I got the information from Pollack's Arabs at War and Blue Helmets by

Second- I meant America. Totally my bad.

Three- I never said they were. I was mere pointing out to you that the US-Egypt relationship wasn't as one way as you implied.

Four- I doubt the Israeli's provide anywhere the value as they receive from the US. Remember, the US not only forks out money to Israel, but also has eat political costs, reduced prestige in the world, and other issues.

Five- Of course not. Egypt really needs the US. Of course the US really needs an Egypt that keeps the Suez safe.

Sixth- At this point I don't see the PA doing anything to earn the money we hand out to them. Of course, the PA keeps its whining to a minimum when the US tells them what to do.

I'd also like to take this moment to point to Laura, that calling disabled veterans who, after leaving the service, work at non-profits that educate children, is rude. Also, Laura, I don't care for the Egyptians or the PA. I know this will be hard to understand but one can dislike moochers like Israel and moochers like Egypt equally at the same time.

Also it was never implied that Israel bankrupted the US. All I said is that those who receive government handouts be they the IDF, Hosni, or section-8ers have to make their benefactor happy.

Looking at a review of Pollack's book of course raises the point of exactly what importance--if any--one should ascribe to the addition of Egyptian troops to any effort. In any case, without the book nor any links, I don't know the extent of the troop involvement or if they did anything.

That said, how would Egypt sending troops--if they did--repay the enormous debt to the US. I would think cutting back on the anti-US propaganda in the state-controlled press would be more appropriate.

That said, if all the Egyptians have done is send in their less than stellar army, I would contend the US aid is still one-sided.

As far as Israel paying back--besides the fact that we are talking about paying back loans--there is shared technology, information, and the bombing of the reactor in Iraq. Of course, if you oppose the war in Iraq, you won't think much of that. Then again, the then Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney sent Begin a note in 1991: "With thanks and appreciation. You made our job easier in Desert Storm."

You say the US is 'forking out money' to Israel without responding to Laura's point about loans.

Just how much 'loss of prestige' is due to Israel as opposed to jealousy of the US or reaction to other policies? Are you claiming that all the US has to do is dump Israel and she will be loved?

The US needs Egypt to keep the Suez safe??? Now there's a reson to give the Sinai back to Israel! Especially considering Al Qaeda'a past success in the area--and how Egypt was so easily overrun by Gazans.

"Of course, the PA keeps its whining to a minimum when the US tells them what to do."--what exactly does this mean? In any case the PA eats up US aid without benefiting anyone. The US funds incompetence and corruption--talk about the US losing prestige...

Finally, you still fail to draw any distinction between loans and mooching. Drawing a comparison between Egypt and Israel is simplistic best.

"Hi there"--

Just how are the settlements in the West Bank illegal?

Short answer: they aren't

Longer answer:

Jews have lived in Judea and Samaria — the West
Bank since ancient times.

The only time Jews have been prohibited from living in the territories in recent decades was during Jordan's rule from 1948 to 1967. This prohibition was contrary to the Mandate for Palestine adopted by the League of Nations, which provided for the establishment of a
Jewish state, and specifically encouraged "close settlement by Jews on the land."

Numerous legal authorities dispute the charge that
settlements are"illegal." International law scholar Stephen Schwebel notes that acountry acting in self-defense may seize and occupy territory when necessaryto protect itself. Schwebel also observes that a state may require, as a condition for its withdrawal, security measures designed to ensure its citizens are not menaced again from that territory (*American Journal of International Law*, April, 1970, pp. 345-46).

According to Eugene Rostow, a former Undersecretary of State for Political
Affairs in the Johnson Administration, Resolution
242 gives Israel a legal right to be in the West Bank. The resolution. Rostow noted, "allows Israel to administer the territories" it won in
1967 "until 'a just and lasting peace in the Middle East' is achieved," Rostow
wrote (*New Republic*, October 21, 1991, p. 14).

"I'd also like to take this moment to point to Laura, that calling disabled veterans who, after leaving the service, work at non-profits that educate children, is rude"
.....................................
I have no idea what on Earth you are talking about. I have never nor would I ever deride disabled veterans. What do you think I called them?