Latest

Lobby

Search

Options

Help

Login

Isn't it time for the U.S. to finally take a neutral position between Israel and the Palestinians?

Printer-friendly format

Email this thread to a friend

Bookmark this thread

This topic is archived.

Home » Discuss » General Discussion

Ken Burch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 02:28 AM
Original message

Poll question: Isn't it time for the U.S. to finally take a neutral position between Israel and the Palestinians?

Edited on Sun May-22-11 02:28 AM by Ken Burch

President Obama's latest statements are kind of a nice start, but shouldn't we finally admit that we should be totally even-handed on this dispute, given that both sides have equal grievances and equally legitimate claims for their positions?

If we actually do want this to end with peace, justice, and reconciliation, shouldn't we finally take the one position we can take that would assist that...and be a truly honest broker on this issue?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Name removed

(0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 02:31 AM
Response to Original message

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Ken Burch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #1

3. It's not Republican to admit Palestinians have as many grievances against the Israeli government

as Israelis have against Palestinians.

The only way to end the war is to admit that nobody's morally superior in this. Is that asking too much?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kurska

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 02:34 AM
Response to Original message

2. Punted to I/P and then locked.

HEY GUYS LOOK I AM FORTUNE TELLER.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Electric Monk

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-28-11 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #2

72. Funny, it's still here almost a week later.

Perhaps there's been a change of policy? :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

FLAprogressive

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 02:41 AM
Response to Original message

4. No, I think we should be "anti-Israeli settlement in the West Bank" and not "neutral"...

Edited on Sun May-22-11 02:45 AM by FLAprogressive

and we should do everything we can to piss off Joe Lieberman (Likud-CT), Lindsey Graham, John McCain, and AIPAC.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Crunchy Frog

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #4

52. Yes, that too. Or just call it "pro-international law".

And I think we need to help the hardline pro-Israel factions see that this approach is in the long term best interests for their vision of the state of Israel.

If nothing is done about this, then they WILL end up with a one state solution in which Jews will be a minority (albeit a very large minority). Is that really what they want?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

leftynyc

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #4

58. So - do you include

the Christian lawmakers in your slam about working for Israel or do you just save that for the Jews like Lieberman? Pres Obama has spoken out against the settlements many times.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

FLAprogressive

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #58

66. Since when were McCain and Graham Jews??

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 05:42 AM
Response to Original message

5. Annexing Palestine was an experiment doomed to failure.

Everyone involved knew it and every minute of history ever since has proven it was doomed to failure from the very start.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cali

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 06:06 AM
Response to Reply #5

8. are you talking about the settlements or the establishment of Israel itself?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #8

12. I'm saying annexing Palestine to create Israel was doomed to failure

Edited on Sun May-22-11 08:52 AM by nonperson

There will never be peace because rather than annexing land of a vanquished foe in, which would have been understandable in light of reparations for the Holocaust, foreign colonial powers decided Palestine would be taken away from the people living there under the standard pretext; "It's not really their land -- THE BRITISH CONTROL IT."

That seems to be the excuse that was supposed to convince everyone in this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=352885&mesg_id=352885

But...

HOW THE HELL DO THE BRITISH CLAIM SUFFICIENT SOVEREIGNTY OVER PALESTINE TO GIVE IT AWAY?

What would Israel do if a colonial power annexed their land and gave it back to the Palestinians?

I was told earlier that it is unjust to take land away from current residents based on a prior injustice after such a long time. But this is the definition of the claim the Jewish people make for Israel. So the annexing of Palestine was unjust and what is being done to the Palestinian people today in retaliation for their demand their land be returned is beyond unjust. It is an affront to the entire human race. And people wonder why there is no peace in the middle east when the reason is as plain as the nose on their face.

Edit to add link.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cali

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #12

14. the history of the world is one of rampant injustice. the fact is that whether you

consider the establishment of Israel to be a failure or a success, it happened. It can't be undone, anymore than the U.S. can be undone because we subjugated the original inhabitants. And really, the exercise of rewriting history is rather a futile one, because we can't know what would have been. there are far too many variables. The creation of many if not most of the world's nation states is rooted in arbitrariness, injustice and violence. Israel isn't singular in that regard.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #14

15. Then what land is going to be annexed for the Palestinian people

Who are suffering under Israel much like the Jewish people suffered under Germany?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cali

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #15

19. say what? no, it's not akin to what happened to the Jews under the Nazis

Edited on Sun May-22-11 09:52 AM by cali

fortunately it's not even close. That is not to diminish the suffering or the Palestinians, it's to accurately reflect history. As for what land will be annexed for the Palestinians, the answer is likely none. Under the best scenario, Israel and the Palestinians will swap land so that a contiguous Palestine will come into being. As Pema Chodron says: Start where you are, so although it may not have been the best thing for Israel to have been created to begin with, destroying Israel is not a viable option.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #19

22. Everyone is talking about destroying Israel

Edited on Sun May-22-11 09:49 AM by nonperson

Except me. No one is giving that much attention to the fact that Palestine was already destroyed. How do we make that right?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cali

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #22

25. of course you're talking about it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #25

27. This is why nothing will every change

Mention any type of compromise and supporters of Israel start whining dishonestly about destroying Israel so they don't have to compromise.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Name removed

(0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #27

30. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

coalition_unwilling

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #15

26. You cheapen and demean the plight of both Palestinians since World War II and

Edited on Sun May-22-11 09:58 AM by coalition_unwilling

Jews under Nazi Germany by using the simile 'much like'. The two situations are NOT 'much like'. No way, no how.

Do you see Israel attacking and occupying Jordan with the singular purpose of exterminating the Palestinians who live there, on the grounds that Israel needs lebensraum and the Palestinians are untermensch?

Give me a friggin' break.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #26

32. Oh, of course, I forgot, please for give me

No one suffers like Israel.

Palestinians are oppressed by Israel as Jews were oppressed by Germany. You decide what level you think is acceptable. I say no level is acceptable. Especially for a people who have experienced what they are currently dishing out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cali

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #32

37. Is that what the poster said? Of course not. The poster stated facts.

I realize you're loath to encumber yourself with anything so pedestrian, but the facts are that millions of Jews and others were exterminated by the Nazis. The Palestinians have not, thankfully, suffered that fate. And those, dearie, are the facts. duh.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #37

38. I said ghetto like others

Not death camp, dear.

Reading is fundamental but apparently it passed you and many others here by.

Conflating statements into false comparisons. Par for the course with Israel. Any objection or criticism of Israel is met with cries of "You're trying to destroy Israel!" in order to keep from discussing the facts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

coalition_unwilling

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #38

44. Few people deny that the Palestinians suffer and that at least some

of their suffering is attributable to the policies of Israel, along with other Arab states in the region, over the years.

What people like me do object to is your statement in post #15 that Palestinians "are suffering under Israel much like the Jewish people suffered under Germany".

Now why do I object to such a statement?

Because Nazi Germany, after the Wannsee Conference in early 1942, mobilized the entire machinery of the state to the sole purpose of implementing the Final Solution, no less than the systematic extermination of European Jewry. You can point to no such equivalent or even remotely similar policy on Israel's part since 1947, nor can you show that Palestinians have been exterminated en masse in death camps.

Why is your false simile ("much like") a problem? Because people who know what happened to Europe's Jews during World War II know that, as bad as the suffering of the Palestinians has been since 1947, it has been NOTHING like what the Jews suffered. Hence, we dismiss anything further that you might have to say because you have shown a gross intellectual dishonesty in setting up a false comparison. If you're so dishonest there, why should your insight or advice be trusted anywhere else?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Ken Burch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #44

49. As a person who sympathizes with the Palestinian people, I object to the comparison as well

It's equally abhorrent, however, to use the Holocaust to silence discussion of Israeli "security" policies. The Palestinians had nothing to do with Hitler's acts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

coalition_unwilling

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #49

51. On that I think we can both agree. Thanks for stepping in here, btw. Way past

time for a thorough review and overhaul of U.S. middle east policy and the question your OP raises is quite a propos to that review, imho.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #49

57. "The Palestinians had nothing to do with Hitler's acts."

Yet the Palestinians had to give up their land for Israel. Why not the Germans? Why not German land annexed as reparations?

And to those who continually suggest it isn't fair to remove people from their land after such a long time I would remind you this is exactly what was done to the Palestinian people and it wasn't that long ago. Certainly only a fraction of the time since the Jewish people lived there. Sixty-eight years is not a long time by comparison.

Why is this supposed justification for the state of Israel a one-way street heading out of Palestine?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RZM

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-25-11 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #57

71. For the record, lots of German land was annexed

And ethnically cleansed to boot. But it went to the Poles, mainly because Stalin was adamant about returning to 1941 borders, which included the large swath of Poland the Soviets had seized in collusion with the Nazis in 1939.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftishBrit

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #49

63. I agree on both points.

I call it 'Godwinizing' in both cases.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RZM

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-25-11 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #49

69. You're right, they didn't. But . . .

You have some scholars advancing the argument that the Nazis had some influence in postwar conceptions of Jews in the Arab world.

http://www.amazon.com/Nazi-Propaganda-Arab-World-Preface/dp/0300168055/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1306363699&sr=8-1

I agree the Holocaust shouldn't be 'stopper' that prevents us from discussing the less savory side of Israeli policies. But that doesn't meant the Holocaust isn't still relevant to the I/P issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #44

56. What part of ghetto don't you people understand

Or is this more of the standard obligatory group rage against any comparison to the suffering Jews endured with the suffering Palestinians are enduring under Israel.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RZM

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-25-11 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #56

70. I think it's you who doesn't get this ghetto thing

Palestinians have been dealing with their confinement (if you will) for decades now. Please remind me again what happened to the residents of the Nazi ghettos in Poland? Did those last decades too? Oh wait, that's right, they were liquidated and their denizens shipped off to the death camps during the war.

If you're dead-set on using European historical references here, why not equate today's situation in Palestine to the plight of Jews in the Russian Empire (though that doesn't work all that well either)? They were mostly concentrated in a certain area,' were heavily discriminated against and denied equal rights by the anti-Semitic government and sometimes subjected to organized violence. They were also poor and endured these circumstances for a very long time.

Of course, saying that the Israelis are behaving like 'The Tsars' just doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RZM

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-25-11 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #15

68. Not so much . . .

That argument, like most that attempt to link the Nazis to current situations), simply doesn't work. The real reason you hear it is not because Israelis behave like Nazis, but because Nazis represent pure evil, so the temptation to link a group one doesn't like to them is often too strong to resist.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftishBrit

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #12

16. 'What would Israel do if a colonial power annexed their land...'

Edited on Sun May-22-11 09:10 AM by LeftishBrit

Colonial powers did annexe their land. For centuries.

The Palestinians' land too, of course. Palestine has NEVER been free from colonialism or occupation: now Israel; formerly Jordan and Egypt; formerly Britain; formerly the Ottoman Empire. It wasn't that a formerly independent Palestine was given to Israel; it was that previously colonially-run land was divided in a particular way. There were many Jews already there by 1948.

Of course Palestine needs and deserves a state now, and the occupation and settlements need to end. But what makes Israel somehow uniquely bad among states that were created after the British Empire ended? Why for example is the partition between India and Pakistan, with all the associated bloodshed, ethnic cleansings, and forced relocations not regarded in the same way?

Moreover: even if one for the moment accepts that Israel shouldn't have been created where it was, it's there NOW. It can't be abolished without massive war - is that what you really want?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #16

18. What I want

Is some semblance of justice for the Palestinian people who had their land stolen from them and are being horribly oppressed while being painted as the bad guys in a situation not of their own making that was an injustice against them, not the Jewish people or Israel.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cali

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #18

20. what does that justice look like?

is it realistic? can it be accomplished without massive bloodshed?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #20

21. What did the injustice look like that created Israel?

Was Israel accomplished without bloodshed? Everyone knew the consequences of annexing Palestine to create Israel and it was done in spite of them knowing. If those lengths were acceptable for the creation of Israel why are they not acceptable for Palestine?

It could hopefully be accomplished peacefully this time if Israel would cooperate. I would also like Israel to make reparations to the Palestinian people for their land and the oppression they suffer.

An apology would be nice too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

coalition_unwilling

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #21

28. You are grossly mis-using the word 'annex' at least as the term

is used in common parlance. The former British Palestine was partitioned, there was no annexing going on that I'm aware of.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #28

33. Semantics

They annexed a partition. LOLOL

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

coalition_unwilling

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #33

45. They (Israel) did NOT annex a partition. You are the one

engaging in semantics and not particularly clever ones at that.

History does not support your assertions, nor does logic. So, reluctantly, I must bid you adieu.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #45

60. So Palestine was taken from the Palestinians

Even though you refuse to admit there was a Palestine, or more accurately you once again attempt to explain Palestine away in standard colonial fashion, then you say the land stolen from the Palestinians wasn't annexed it was partitioned when the focus should be on the fact that the Palestinian people were forced from their land under the pretext of explaining away Palestine as some imagined homeland for Israel when proper reparations should have come from the people who subjected the Jewish people to the Holocaust. But for the past sixty-eight years the people forced to submit reparations following WWII are the Palestinians.

That's not clever. It isn't meant to be. It's a simple statement of fact.

And history?

I'm sure you've heard the quote (often attributed to Churchill but whose author is widely considered to be that most prolific of such authors, "unknown" ) -
History is the propaganda of the victor.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Crunchy Frog

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #16

53. Vis a vis India/Pakistan

could it be that India does not have an ongoing project to establish illegal settlements in Pakistani territory with the hope of establishing "facts on the ground" that will enable them to eventually annex said territory?

Yes, the actual process of establishing the two states, and the large scale population transfers were traumatic, but that phase ended. It has not been followed by a decades long project of continuing colonization and land appropriation.

Whether or not the establishment of Israel was a mistake, it's here now and should not (and could not) be abolished. The coloniziation and settlement enterprise is a different matter entirely.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #53

64. Abolishing Isreal is not the question or the threat

The question is the Palestinian people. Israel was owed reparations and a homeland for their treatment under the Germans. The Germans should have made the reparations. But the Palestinians were forced to make reparations they did not owe. Now Israel must make reparations to the Palestinian people for the treatment the Palestinians received under Israel. Losing their land and suffering oppression at the hands of the people who ultimately any way you look it essentially stole their land regardless of the twisted colonial logic of the theft.

When do the Palestinian people get their reparations for losing their land their freedom their lives and their dignity as a people?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Crunchy Frog

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #64

65. I agree with you there, though it's not addressing the content of my post.

I'm wondering if you replied to me by mistake.

I think that any sort of ultimate peace agreement is going to have to deal, not only with land issues, but with some sort of reparations for the Palestinian people, maybe coming from the international community as a whole, since Israel was really established by the international community, and it was arguably necessary due to the failings of that community towards the Jews, both during and after WWII, and then they of course followed up by failing the Palestinian people.

But that's a completely different issue than the one I was addressing in my post. I was replying to someone who suggested that the Israel/Palestine situation isn't really that different than the partition that set up Pakistan which was accompanied by large scale population transfers. I was just telling her how I thought the two situations differed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftishBrit

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-25-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #53

67. Fair enough (though there is still a long-term territorial dispute re Kashmir)

My comment was to someone who seemed to regard the *creation* of Israel as uniquely bad; not with regard to the current situation.

'Whether or not the establishment of Israel was a mistake, it's here now and should not (and could not) be abolished. The coloniziation and settlement enterprise is a different matter entirely'

Agree on all points (though I might say 'occupation rather than 'colonization' but that is a technicality). I agree that Israel exists, cannot and should not be abolished, and that the occupation and settlements do need to end.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Recovered Repug

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #5

29. You do know that the when Israel was created,

the same resolution called for the creation of an Arab state also? Guess which side accepted it and which side chose war?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #29

35. Guess which side was having its land stolen

Would Israel do any differently? Hell no. They aren't doing any differently even as we speak.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

SoCalDem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #29

61. okay..

Let's say that you have a nice house on some land that's been in your family for hundreds of years.

Now someone you don't know, gets a third party to agree to give it to them because they convinced him that even before your ancestors came along, their ancestors claimed that same land your house is on..

They agree on a "deal" and tell you to move.. Would you just pack up & move without a fight?...even if they "promise" that someday they will see to it that you get another place? what if you liked where you were, and did not want to move.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

closeupready

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 05:51 AM
Response to Original message

6. We give Israel billions every year; unless you are referring to that,

we can't possibly be 'neutral'. We are, in fact, pro-Israel.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bluetex

(83 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 06:05 AM
Response to Reply #6

7. We also give financial aid to Hamas and Palestine....

that would, at least by definition....make the US GOVERNMENT neutral.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nonperson

(901 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #7

17. This web site contradicts your assertion

Edited on Sun May-22-11 09:15 AM by nonperson

I did a quick Google search so I am not familiar with this web site but these are the figures they claim.

"The U.S. is providing Israel with at least $8.2 million each day* in military aid and is giving the Palestinians $0** in military aid during Fiscal Year 2011."

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/usaid.html

More from a site called Palestine Monitor:

http://www.palestinemonitor.org/spip/spip.php?article17

US Aid: The Facts

- Israel and the US have a long-established special relationship. The US was the first country to recognise the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.
- Israel is considered America�s closest non-NATO ally in the Middle East, a region that is geopolitically crucial to the US.
- The close relationship between the two states is reflected in the volume of aid Israel receives from the US. Since World War II Israel has been the largest overall recipient of US aid: from 1949-2006 Israel received more than $156 billion of direct US aid.
- Until 2003, Israel received approximately one-third of the annual US foreign aid budget. In 2005, the US gave Israel more than $2.6 billion in aid, a budget exceeded only by US aid to Iraq. By comparison, Jordan received $683.6 million, Rwanda received $77 million, and the Occupied Palestinian Territories received $348.2 million.
- In the past, a majority of the direct US aid to Israel was via US Economic Support Funds (ESF). The US publicly states that ESF are given in order to support stability in areas strategic to the US. However, the recipient government completely controls how it spends these funds.
- The US also lends money to Israel, but these loans are frequently waived before any repayments are made. The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs has estimated that from 1974-2003 Israel benefited from more than $45 billion in waived loans from the US.
- Direct US aid to Israel has significantly diminished since 1996 in order to reduce Israeli financial dependence on the US. Speaking to the US Congress in July 1996, Former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu declared, �We will begin the long-term process of gradually reducing the level of your generous economic assistance to Israel.�

There are many more hits but those are two near the top with information I was seeking.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Crunchy Frog

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #7

55. Whatever we may give them is to try to keep them quiescent

and is ultimately geared towards the interests of Israel.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

GeorgeGist

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 07:46 AM
Response to Original message

9. Brokers, even honest ones ...

are not neutral. They have a stake in the outcome.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Motown_Johnny

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 07:51 AM
Response to Original message

10. define even handed and neutral

If you want to be truely honest then you need to admit that a bunch of white guys drew lines on a map to create Israel and the people already living there were not taken into account.

I'm not sure anyone can look at this without some bias. I know I can't.

Trying to find something that works is the best we can hope for, even if it isn't fair to everyone. I think the '67 boarders is a good place to start.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Ken Burch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #10

43. I do admit what you say in that first sentence

And whatever resolution of this situation is reached does need to have an acknowledgment that the Palestinians suffered undersevedly in 1948, and need both compensation and apologies for that.

Acknowledgement, compensation and apologies can be given without endangering Israel's survival in the slightest.

The '67 borders need to be the basis for what happens next, and probably some sort of federation between the two states needs to occur so that the Israeli government can't just choke off a Palestinian state economically and through infrastructure anytime it wants to.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

obxhead

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:36 AM
Response to Original message

11. Other.

I think it's time the US stands up for the Palestinians.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mr. Jefferson

(141 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:54 AM
Response to Original message

13. Only if you hold a neutral position between right and wrong.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Shagbark Hickory

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:50 AM
Response to Original message

23. Clearly getting involved in this mess has not made us any friends.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

treestar

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:51 AM
Response to Original message

24. Yes

As someone who has no dog in the fight, I'm sort of tired of both of them. Provoking each other and then claiming victimhood. No intent to settle anything. It's almost like they don't want to.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

FLPanhandle

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #24

31. +1

I'd just like to see us leave them to their own argument.

Both sides have exceeded the bounds of stupidity, cruelty, and religious fanaticism so much that neither side has my sympathies. Right now, I couldn't care about either side as neither has the moral high ground.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Warren DeMontague

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 05:01 PM
Response to Original message

34. I voted "no", because if even defining a 'neutral position' was obvious

this wouldn't be half the mess it is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Taitertots

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 05:06 PM
Response to Original message

36. Your position is based on the flawed premise that Palestinians and Israelis have equal grievances

and equally legitimate claims. This is not the case, so policy should reflect the realities of the situation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Ken Burch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #36

39. Alright, who do you think has more, then?

It's hard to argue that the occupiers have it just as bad as the occupied.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Taitertots

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #39

41. You are using flawed thinking by breaking a complex situation down into occupier and occupied

When the "occupied" are aggressively trying to murder innocent civilians with terrorist attacks, than the scales tip heavily toward the Israelis.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

L0oniX

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 06:48 PM
Response to Original message

40. This thread is doomed to go to I/P. IBTL

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Ken Burch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #40

42. Hasn't yet.

It's about the choices the U.S. government should make, not just about Israel and Palestine.

There's no reason to send it to I/P.

Do you fear this discussion?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Occulus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #42

48. I don't.

Edited on Sun May-22-11 08:43 PM by Occulus

But then, I've never once given a fig for Americans more concerned with Israel than America.

We need to end all funding in any direction, Israel or Palestine. Yes, I am well aware that this would put Israel in "danger". I do not care about that, not one bit. If Israel cannot stand on its own as a nation after all these years, it doesn't deserve the status of 'state' and should be left to fend for itself.

I have nothing but contempt for the governments, and in most cases, the people themselves, on either side. This stupid, unnecessary, uncivilized, barbaric conflict has to end, and the only way I can see to that goal is to just turn the money spigot off.

Let me be completely, perfectly clear so that nobody can read anything into my statements: I do not care about Israel. I do not care about Palestine. I do not care about what the people on either side think about people on the other side. I hold them all in contempt in equal measure.

We should cut all funding posthaste. Those dollars can be better and more productively spent right here in the USA. It should be clear, after all these years, that we have wasted every last cent we have spent in that region of the world.

It's time to let both sides fend completely for themselves.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Puregonzo1188

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:41 PM
Response to Original message

46. No. We should be in favor of justice, human rights, and international law.

Which if we were we'd have a pretty clear consensus on what to do about this conflict.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Distant Observer

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 08:41 PM
Response to Original message

47. This is perhaps the central question of US foreign policy today. A decade of war spirals around it

Regardless of the rationalizations, much of the anger towards the US across have the globe has resulted from a sense that the worlds only superpower supports a great injustice on a defenseless people as a result of religious prejudice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Harmony Blue

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #47

50. It appears that the vote in the Fall (U.N.) is inevitable

so it is possible the United States in the coming months is moving towards this neutral position. But it is a juggling act as it is hard to satisfy both sides in the I/P conflict. But I must say, if both sides are disappointed in the U.S. that may be a starting point for the road to redemption ironically.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Distant Observer

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-22-11 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #50

54. I think the US will find a way to stop the vote. Can't see a 1st Term Pres bucking the Lobby

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

SoCalDem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 08:16 AM
Response to Original message

59. The whole mess needs to be dumped back into the UK's lap

Their map-drawers created the whole mess that everyone's had to deal with for DECADES.

The flaw was that it's always easy to give away other people's land, and then walk away.

Empires end ugly, and the repercussions can never be foreseen.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

meow mix

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon May-23-11 08:22 AM
Response to Original message

62. forbidden topic, toss it in the cellar.

LOL DU is lame on this important issue

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sun May 12th 2024, 06:56 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » General Discussion

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate

About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC