Why does the US suppot Israel

[Ross4356]

After last weeks visit of the Isralie PM and the standing ovations he receuved in the Congress plus this weekends events lt got me wondering exactly why does America support Israel and never condem them never mind sanction them.

I thought I would had a look on Wikipedia to see how many Jews they were in the States and to my surprise there are only 5.8million or 1.7%. That is only 3 times as many muslims.

So why the overwealming support

[CB_NO3]

I think the USA built Israel's army so they could babysit the Middle East for them. I can see tensions growing in the next decade though between the Yanks and Israel.

[steakbake]

I think the USA built Israel's army so they could babysit the Middle East for them. I can see tensions growing in the next decade though between the Yanks and Israel.

Yes, I can see them falling out. In a big way. Israel has been emboldened by decades of night on unconditional US support.

Why the US supports Israel?

- Cultural links
- A client state in a volatile part of the world
- Strategic importance of pro-Israeli and "zionist" voters both of Christian and Jewish backgrounds to successive governments.
- The influence of these people in the positions of power in US politics, economics and society.

Robert Fisk's recent article about the death of American influence in the Middle East was, I think, excellent. He was making the point that despite all the grandstanding in Cairo by Obama and the eventual expressions of support from the US government, it was too little too late and people in the M/E simply don't care or listen to what America thinks.

In light of this, it seems the US starting to piss Israel off has less to do with a genuine change in US views on the occupation but more to do with trying to buy back some influence and credibility in the Middle East by being or at least seeming, a little less unconditional in support of Israel. I mean, proposing the 1964 borders?? It's like kicking someone in the nuts then letting them have a wee slap of your face to make them feel better about it.

[Ross4356]

Thanks for the reply and ill have a read of the article u mentioned.

Do you think the next republican gov. In the states will have a similar stance to the Israael as the obama gov. I.e they will as confuntational?

[steakbake]

Thanks for the reply and ill have a read of the article u mentioned.

Do you think the next republican gov. In the states will have a similar stance to the Israael as the obama gov. I.e they will as confuntational?

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/who-cares-in-the-middle-east-what-obama-says-2290761.html

That's the article there I was telling you about.

I don't know. I think to be honest, that there's lots of factors. I dont think the US are openly confrontational with the other states. They propped up various people in the region, including Mubarak in Egypt. Their support of Saudi Arabia, in effect a theocracy run by the Sauds is as baffling as their support of Israel. Saudi Arabia is as brutally conservative as Israel is militaristic and confrontational. Israel at least is run in the semblance of a democracy. Saudi Arabia is basically a family run business.

I'm not well informed on it all and my views are biased, not formed from direct experience and are more opinions that statements of fact. I think though, that Robert Fisk is one of the few journalists who don't seem to have an agenda and if you're interested in reading as neutral and as matter-of-fact an account of it as you can get, he's worth a read.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/

[Ross4356]

Thanks mate ill definatley have a read of his articles

[PeeJay]

After last weeks visit of the Isralie PM and the standing ovations he receuved in the Congress plus this weekends events lt got me wondering exactly why does America support Israel and never condem them never mind sanction them.

I thought I would had a look on Wikipedia to see how many Jews they were in the States and to my surprise there are only 5.8million or 1.7%. That is only 3 times as many muslims.

So why the overwealming support

Isn't this obvious? No USA support = No Israel.
Whether you are for or against that is another matter.

[(((Fergus)))]

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/who-cares-in-the-middle-east-what-obama-says-2290761.html

That's the article there I was telling you about.

I don't know. I think to be honest, that there's lots of factors. I dont think the US are openly confrontational with the other states. They propped up various people in the region, including Mubarak in Egypt. Their support of Saudi Arabia, in effect a theocracy run by the Sauds is as baffling as their support of Israel. Saudi Arabia is as brutally conservative as Israel is militaristic and confrontational. Israel at least is run in the semblance of a democracy. Saudi Arabia is basically a family run business.

I'm not well informed on it all and my views are biased, not formed from direct experience and are more opinions that statements of fact. I think though, that Robert Fisk is one of the few journalists who don't seem to have an agenda and if you're interested in reading as neutral and as matter-of-fact an account of it as you can get, he's worth a read.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/

What a load of *****

[da-robster]

Thanks for the reply and ill have a read of the article u mentioned.

Do you think the next republican gov. In the states will have a similar stance to the Israael as the obama gov. I.e they will as confuntational?

I'm pretty sure that the Bush administration had a similar policy of returning to the old borders, and he was a republican, but if the president in 2012 is a republican again, they will almost certainly be even less confrontational, as no candidate would get the primaries without promising complete allegiance to israel, especially as the extremely right wing tea party are basically in control of them.

So basically if Obama is defeated then the next president will be very unconfrontational, but if the tea party have died off, then the next republican may be more agressive towards them because he may try and win over the newly democratised middlec east.

[hibsbollah]

Thanks mate ill definatley have a read of his articles

Fisk is definitely the man to read; hes been on the ground in war zones in the region for years and knows his subject inside out. He interviewed OBL when he was funded by the CIA fighting the Russians. He decided a long time ago that Israel was the main regional bad guy, so i wouldnt call him 'neutral'. He is, however, completely correct.

[steakbake]

What a load of *****

I am shocked you disagree :rolleyes:

[LiverpoolHibs]

A vast number of reasons, not all of which can be covered in one post but included are:

The central role that Israel plays as a coercive force in the region - stabilising nations that are supportive of U.S./Israeli interests in the region; with carrots and/or with sticks. There is, of course, now a fair amount of evidence to suggest this historical role may be falling apart with the toppling of Mubarak et. al. - we'll need some time to be able to see if this impacts on U.S. policy with regard to Israel.

Israel's proven ability to act as a proxy of the U.S. when it is overstretched or when it is not politically or militarily expedient to engage directly. This can be seen, despite the massive failure, during the 33 Day War in Lebanon when it was expected that Israel could wipe out Hezbollah as a force in the region and neuter Iranian influence as a potential obstruction to American hegemony.

Linked to that is Israel's willingness to hand out 'object lessons' on behalf of the U.S. (and itself), as we saw in Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2009. The lesson being - as we keep failing in our attempts to nullify billigerants opposed to U.S. hegemony (Hezbollah and other elements of the Lebanese resistance, Hamas etc.) we will punish the wider population for having them in their midst. As with Gaza, so with Fallujah.

The ideological centrality of Israel to American foreign policy. The War of Civilisations rhetoric that was at its height during Bush the Younger's tenure could draw on Israel's supposed position as the "calm and cultivated villa in the midst of the jungle" as Ehud Barak put it.

Israel's militarism and tendency towards 'sabre-rattling' creates a sense of the region on a permanent war footing. This is seen to legitimise a continuous U.S. presence and ensures high oil prices.

It is an important testing ground for new weapons technologies and is absolutely central to the enormous profits accrued by arms manufacturers. The most blatant example is the c. $4 billion that Israel receives in aid from the U.S. per year (this is a lynchpin of the Lobby argument that I'll get to later) - around 80% of which must be spent on arms from American manufacturers.

Similarly, it is one of the most profitable areas of the globe in which American capital can invest. Israel is renowned for the enormous state subsidies it gives to companies coming in to Israel - particularly those based in high-technology.

As steakbake suggests Israel acts as a garrison in a volatile but massively important area of the world and has been used as a makeweight with every nascent power in the region; from Nasser's Egypt to Ahmedinejad's Iran.

The lobby thesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Israel_Lobby_and_U.S._Foreign_Policy) has been alluded to already on this thread and I think it's something you have to be pretty careful with (steakbake, of course, doesn't endorse it so these certainly aren't criticisms of his post). America acts as it does towards Israel and the Palestinians because it benefits from the relationship, the idea that a small group of people - of questionable loyalty, natch - within the American political system are able to manipulate the machinery of government to act against American interests stinks of old anti-Semitic tropes, in my opinion.