The west has smacked down nations like this before. In both world wars the US had a huge population of German ancestery and with the second one a population of Italian ancestry nearly as large.

Beyond the Jewish lobby which brags about its power and condemns a non-Jew who mentions it, I see two factors which mitigate ending his nonsense.

1) If the Jewish government it replaced, the Palestinians become a nuclear power.

2) Any embargo will fall on the occupied Palestinians first and the non-jewish Israelis second. Consider them hostages to an embargo. (But still these first line victims call for one.)

As for its day to day profitability, it is the sex capital of the Med and ranked the same as Thailand and for the same reasons. It is the Ecstacy capital of the world and has a share of other drugs. It is a major money laundering center. Ever since Meier Lansky they have learned to "emigrate" with their no-questions-asked cash before there are major indictments. against them. They just have to be worth more than their bad press.

It is also a major player in gun running being behind the fighting in Darfur. It supplies the Kurds against the Turks. It supplied Iran in the Iran-Contra affair. It is a major player in the blood diamond and coltan markets.

When one considers it foreign exchange comes mainly from tourism and out of season crops just like Mexico one has to question how its above board arms sales can possibly support the country even at its barely modest level by European standards.

So on top of 1) and 2) there is a lot of cash to spread around under the table.

Then there is the US charity in the amount of some $5-6B annually in cash and indirectly. At least 10% of it comes back to the US in overpayments to people who support AIPAC and the dozens of contributors it controls.

It only makes sense as a massive criminal enterprise. And when you look into the backgrounds of most of the "founders" of Israel further than their terrorist activities in Palestine you find overtly criminal backgrounds such as bank robbery. At least when the Mafia went legit in Las Vegas it was for real as far as their operations in the state were concerned.

If you follow their own newspapers on events in Israel you quickly see the government is little more than organized anarchy. They openly discuss seeing a politician before requesting anything from the bureaucracy being a necessity. I read a three part article about the businesses on the shores of Lake Kinneret, aka Sea of Galilee, having operated in defiance of all laws from the beginning and not one attempt at enforcing the laws in decades. This is Prohibition Era Chicago not a country.

To bring it all back home, this is jewish morality in practice rather than in theory.

The longer this thread continues the more people are speaking their mind about the Jews. The only objection appears to be my saying Jews instead of Israelis even though the Israelis claim to be a Jewish nation and to act on behalf of all Jews and around 80% of the non-Israeli Jews agree with that position. Again, too many fakes here, either fake Jews or fake atheists. It is impossible to be both.

Also I think a jewish person invented the ballpoint pen if I'm not mistaken.

It was invented by Anne Frank.

Yes, I agree with all of that except that is not what has happened. And that is why us skeptics look for other, simpler reasons such as religion. If we look at what the West has done after missionaries have done their dirty is to support Christians in other countries. The US got into serious support of South Vietnam by supporting the ruling Catholic minority against the godless communists. Lebanon was taken from Syria by France in hopes of creating a small country ruled by Christians. There are other examples.

But if the realpolitik suggestion you make were in force just what is that shitty, little country doing which is what the west wants it to do? After its failure in 1956 to legitimize retaking the Suez from Nassar what has it done for the west? Did the West really want Israel to start the 1967 war? (Keeping in mind that is what happened as Israelis have always said even though not publicized in the West.)

One can even make a Cold War claim that it was an ally and ignore other countries turned to the Soviet Union because of the support of Israel in the West. The Cold War has been over for 20 years. The West abandoned all other useless countries at the end of the Cold War. In the region Somalia is but one example. What is the use of Israel now that the Cold War is over?

Seems to me from 1988 to now the West has had a major interest in stable oil supplies from the mideast. Israe is no where near those oils supplies. The countries that surround Israel do not have significant oil supplies. Israel and the surrounding countries should fall below other than diplomatic interest. Any knowledge of history indicates that Turkey and Egypt should take over the region and keep the peace. FDR's pledge of US protection to the Saud clan is not threatened by this. Iraq was a major ally of the US and we could have made nice to Iran by now. Pakistan was already a friend to they could keep the peace in Afghanistan.

Israel keeps making problems for the West in the middle east so far as I or anyone can see. An outpost of democracy? Lebanon became a democracy five years before Israel existed. Besides, why do we need outposts? Both Germany and Japan were democracies before and during WWII. Why is that a good thing? Diplomats do not have to ask that question. They know it means nothing but a political claim for the masses. It is not sacred and is usually bullshit.

So please tell me just what Israel does to survive and avoid being stomped on in your world of realpolitik. I see nothing but a religious attachment by braindead redneck Americans. What do you see?

Actually I have not asked that. I have pointed out US support of Israel is contrary to US interests as it is both a financial, military and diplomatic drain upon the US and its resources. I have not explored the fact that support of Israel is clearly contrary to the stated ideals of the US because I expect self-interest to rule in international affairs. Because of my expectation of self-interest I find the support of Israel to be contrary to the self-interest of the United States.

Factually it is untrue that the zionist animals used the US experience with the Indians as an example, ideal or was in fact considered. The movement was always oriented towards European colonialism. Its original stated goal was independent of where their utopia would be created. It was the clear statement that Jews could never assimilate into Christian Europe, the same idea adopted by the Nazi party decades later.

When discussions arose as to where this land should be it adopted not the US paradigm but the European colonial paradigm of bringing the blessings of European civilization to the primitive peoples outside of Europe. It used the British civilizing India as an example to which it aspired.

When they first settled on Palestine for their domain they wrote and swore they did not want the native population to leave however they did not intend for them to have any civil rights. If they were to have civil rights, such as voting, the zionist crap would have been shitcanned with the first election. It was Jabotinsky who recognized Europe would insist upon a pluralistic society and thus they native population had to be removed.

As to the claim Israel is loyal to western interests that is only in the propaganda of the Israel and the izziehuggers. Europeans are fully aware Israel does not support either western ideals or interests. European ideals include pluralist, multicultural societies. The discrimination against non-Jewish citizens of Israel is rampant. Segregation is the order of the day. Israel considers only cities to be integrated with that definition being 10% of the population being non-Jewish. Their total non-Jewish population is only nine percent of the total.

Officially Israel's policy to increase "integration" is to build jews-only cities in non-jewish areas.

From official segregation to "separate but equal schools" to no air raid shelters in non-jewish cities this country does not represent western standards in any way.

This is before the western standard is firmly attached to Nuremberg where all the squattertowns in east Jerusalem, the West Bank and on the Golan Heights are war crimes and hanging offfenses.

As for its hypothetical military power the very fact that Israel has nuclear weapons fully justifies any of the countries it has attacked or which it is threatening to attack such as Iran to also obtain nuclear weapons. That is not in the interests of the west or the world.

Its other military power was worthless to the west in the first Iraq war as it was in the second. Its constant threats to shut of middle eastern oil are not helpful either. Nor are its regular threats to nuke Iran. Please do not pretend Israel could do any significant harm to Iran without nukes.

As to its military power on the ground, that only matters if one counts all the reserve forces. If all of those reserve forces are taken from the civilian economy that economy will collapse in a month. You should have read of Israel's fear of a war of attrition. That is why.

Please show me how and where Israel has any loyalty to European ideals. Please show me what all this military power does for the west other than constantly threaten to cause military problems for the west.

I have read all the propaganda and it is all bullshit.

So tell me what western interest there is in continuing to be the democracy it has been since 1943. Tell me what interest the west has is political instability in the middle east. Western interest is in stability. That is why FDR made the deal with King Saud. That is why the US supported the Shah. That is why the US support Saddam Hussein.

What leads you to think the west is interested in instability and why do you think Israel can instigate it? Or are you saying Israel got bin Laden started in his attacks on Arabia? I do not see that in western interests either.

On the other hand I can trace zionist demands on southern Lebanon up to the Litani river back to 1938. Also it did instigate the civil war by supporting the Druze. And in 1956 is attacked Egypt at the behest of Britain and France in its first attempt to take over the Sinai for its mythical promised land.

All in all the capabilities of Israel are extremely limited and can only be used against four countries, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt. Western interests are in those countries being stable now that the west has accomodated Egypt's control of the Suez and shutting it was because of Israel's attack.

So tell me what western interest there is in Israel making trouble. I am not interested in what can be done but is in the interest of the west to have happen. No miracles here. There are exactly four countries involved.

Which has nothing to do with western or US support of Israel nor any generic western interest nor US national interest in the existence of Israel.

I come from Earth, the US, and from twenty years with the US DOD and I assure you the Cold War was real and well defined. I can also assure you most all people in my category have never signed on to anything but dismantling the war machine since about 1995 when it was clear the USSR was not going to resurface. Our reasons is quite simple. If we continue it will bankrupt us as there is no return on the investment that is not cheaper to get by non-military means.

I could consider that a tirade if it were better organized and directed but that is unimporant.

It does not justify or explain either western or US support of Israel. Israel plays no significant part in it. The countries it can impact for a less than 30 term do not have oil. US oil supplies have been guaranteed since FDR as has the rule of the Saud family. Israel could do nothing about Saudi if it wanted to except nuke the oil fields to the detriment of the west and the US -- read blackmail potential. But its actions stir up problems for Saud family rule and thus for the US.

Despite all you have said I still see no value of Israel to the west in general nor the US in particular. In the US I do see 0.014*300M Jews and 40-60M screaming rednecks who support Israel for reasons of religion. When Bush told Sharon to get his tanks out of the West Bank the White House was flooded with calls, email and even telegrams from those screaming redneck voters and he backed down for that reason.

Absent rational reason I stick with my original observation, rednecks of the Christian and Jewish persuasion are responsible for US support of Israel.

Ideological analysis of power relations is not a contender, but just a part of school of realism. In reality, ideas have impact, sometimes a lot, sometimes less and sometimes almost none. So, as long as you are in the business of analysing reality, ideology will be a factor, just like resources, public opinion, supposed oponents and allies and a whole myriad of other things.

Would you say Iran is a democracy? They hold democratic elections, yet they have nothing to do with your idea of democracy. Same with the US governmental system. In the country I am in, calling US system of governing a democracy is a pro-forma thing, something our elected officials do, simply to avoid conflict over such a triviality as a name. You can call it fried chicken, for all they care. And same goes for our system of government only not even half as bad as US has it.

Let me try to explain, though. I like the phrase "point to point navigation". Each person inherits a certain context of life and this is not different for the leaders of countries. What is different, however, is the desireability of positions and nature of the person. For instance, the position I occupy in my society is quite desireable, since it is relatively much better than being just an ordinary worker. Of course, this is relative, since you have to have certain expectations and ambitions combined with insigth or just simple luck to come to such a position. Also you need to actually want to be there. The set of factors that put you into different positions vary, depending on the environment. Naturally, the more structured and thereby predictable the given environment is, the higher degree of skill and motivation is needed to occupy a certain position - the competition is greater. Wilhelm II of Germany was a blathering idiot, but the system was hereditary, so that's pure luck right there. Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord on the other hand, was like a fish in the water during his engagement in politics, diplomacy and conflict, since he managed to navigate an environment that could warrant existance of someone such as he, until his very death. That was skill. Remember not to confuse "skill" with "good" though.

At different times, in different environments, different people get to have different degree of influence. US "democracy" is a very complex system, but it is an environment with certain parameters that will grant you access to positions, so it is predictable on different levels. Of course, it is increasingly becoming a matter of luck, since the luck of not haveing money has become a general condition in all except the very richest, but this is a trend I will come back to later.

I know something about those people who, like our friend Talleyrand, swim through the corridors of power in US corporate, judicial, army and governmental system. They are like many spiders weaving the same web - not always friendly to each other and the web not always perfect, but it'll stop an elephant if thick enough and they like that kind of power. Often the most successful of them are also those who are willing to risk the most and thereby are more volatile in general, like Carl Rove for instance. Many of them have been in those chairs for entire lifetimes, like Rahm Emanuel. The new chief of staff is being presented as a ultra-left liberal and fresh out of the communist party with ideals and competencies of a seasoned politician. Only the last part is true, since he has been in the game for an eternity. Since you are so much into Israel-Palestina stuff, you should know his policies back from the Clinton-era, and he's no crazy religious dude. That policy is bi-partisan, as the euphamism for elitist interest goes. But this can be wiped out, since some of the players run the collective memory system of the US population, like Keith Rupert Murdoch.

And so they sail, point to point navigation. The bigger the ellephant they find, the higher the rush and feeling that they are doing something colosal. It's often a mystery to themselves, how far one can go, so they compete, invent themselves and play a part in the segment of society that keeps pets like Lewis Libby, who on average earn 400 times as much as an average American. Soon to be more, since an average American is loosing his job.

Subverting your democracy is a challenge worth undertaking, and they will do it as well as they would catch an elephant in a spider web. Might be even easier than that, since US never had anything resembling a meaningful and functioning democracy.

When I say western or US interest, I don't mean what you mean by it. After my explanation above, I hope it is obvious that your interest has nothing to do with their interest. In fact, almost with every issue it's the very opposite. Oil price is high - they earn more money on their investment, while you can't get to work. Threat of terrorism is present - you have to do without the national guard, 'cause they sent it on some errand with the convenient excuse lying you in the face. Economy is collapsing and you are losing your job, they are celebrating the largest bonuses in history of economy and draining Federal Treasury at the same time. All the real-estate is going under - you are losing your house to foreclosure, while they are buying freshly devaluated assets. New Jersey is under water - they use reparation funds for golf courts and rich residential areas in safe zones of Louisiana, while kicking people out of perfectly healthy low-rent houses and tearing them down. Economy going under - the whole nation is uncertain of their future, while they are getting ready to decimate the last resistance in the working class.

They factor you in, of course. You are a resource with properties. If treated right, you can be great! So they compete at that too.

I hope it's obvious that saying "US has interest in this or that specifically" is out of the question. They have interest in everything, just not quite the way you think they do. There is no US per say. Just like there is no "ZuS's company" per say, there is only what I want to be done and me doing it the best way I know how. The company is a part of an environment that allows me to exercise my power and it's never enough. Same goes for larger structures, if they are predictable at some level, you can use them to do things with them. Every time you reach your "ultimate goal", a new one appears. It starts materialising in your head, once you drop the notion that status quo is carved in stone.

Here's a guy who might put a small piece of the argument together better than me: http://www.democracynow.org/2009/3/12/parenti

Don't listen to the fancy phrases. It's not that long, just give it a chance.

I guess anyone who is interested can go back and read what you posted but I did not find a single benefit to the US from Israel in it. I do not see the point of going through it line by line and repeating that observation.

Perhaps you could make it simple for me and recite one simple benefit to the US that follows from the existence of Israel. If you do not understand my problem with your claims it is that you make claims but do not cite any benefit to the US from those claims even if they were supported by fact which they are not.

Please try again.

US interest that I talk about often goes directly against the interest of the general US population. I hope that is clear from my post? Do we agree so far?

Assuming this is clear, would you like a nuclear armed friend in an otherwise instable area totally free of charge (US general population expense), or not? Of course, you have many more friends there, but not many that are almost 100% eating out of your hand. Who cares what the interest of the US population is, you have a separate plan for removing their standards of living and turning the country into a third world factory of violence.

And what if you decided to stop using US people's money to support Israel? A nuclear power like that, turning into a regional interest out of your control and in the process losing a 6 billion dolar moneylaundring operation? Don't be crazy.

The US is actually a constitutional republic and is democratic in form. Representatives are elected to legislative and executive positions and do not inherit power. You infer some sort of conspiracy theories in your posts though I'm not sure with which group you associate. 

Have you even been to the US on a visit? I recall that you grew up in a communist country but I don't remember if you ever said which. How have you formed your opinions on the US?Research studies of a personal nature in various locales of all 50 US states or do you get your info from the Internet and opinionated web sites? I'm simply trying to understand how you have learned about our interrelated complicated relationships.

I see you have noticed the US has complex government, but do you grasp what that really means? In Kansas people may be more concerned with regulations involving the local coop grain elevator while in Florida it may be insurance coverage for homeowners. In California it may be access to pot and in Virginia it may be subsidized tobacco. Each US state has a variety of self interests far beyond the federal level.

This assertion somwhat infers that more than 50% of US workers are out of a job. The actual unemployment rate varies in different states from 5 to about 10% which is hardly an average of 50%. What exactly do you think is an average American?

This assertion is based on what? 

I'm not sure what to make of this rant. More conspiracy theory?

Fact is the population of Palestine was NOT nomadic but had a fixed, settled population on the order of 1 million as far back as when PM D'Israeli gave the number for its population.

That they are there now was their free choice knowing the owners of the land were never going to let them live in peace. And since 1967 over a million criminals have settled occupied territory. No one since Nuremberg can beg innocense that settling in occupied territory is a war crime and hanging offense.

As for no solution, that is the choice of the victims of the Jews. If the Palestinians choose to accept nothing they are offered other than full redress of their lawful grievences that is their right. They can in all moral right and under international law continue to kill the thieves even if just for sport.

Thieves and murderers and war criminals have no rights except to die in furtherance of their crimes.

There is no need for Palestinians to compromise on anything. Were they to start tomorrow with civil disobedience in furtherance of a single state solution ending apartheid and segregation they would have it in five years or two weeks after the world puts an oil embargo on Israel because the lights have gone out.

As for alternatives, I just read an estimate of 825,000 Jewish citizens of Israel living in California. That is about 15% of its Jewish population. They had no problem leaving. That may appear ridiculous but I have read in Haaretz how Israel keeps its population records in practice rather than in theory. Essentially it counts all citizens as residents of Israel.

As for Israel cooperating with the powers in the region, the last time that was voluntary was with Iran under the Shah. The US had to bribe Egypt to settle for kicking the Jews out of the Sinai. But that was only after the 1973 war the only one Israel did not start.

The Palestinians are simply not going to disappear. There are way to many millions of them out of reach of the jewish murder machine. As we saw in the Gaza slaughter the Jews are too afraid of dying to make serious war. Under these conditions they lost that war too. Not a single one of its stated objectives was achieved. It wrote its name as failure in the blood of 1300 innocents. Resistance to a blockade is a lawful act in this world. Everyone killed was in fact murdered.

But just to make it fun the Jews did all the fun things they complain out. They forced refugees into a building and then shelled the building. Sounds a lot like the old forced into a barn and the barn burned to me.

It is not a matter of nomadic, semi or otherwise, being negative or positive or neutral. It is simply not true. It is firmly grounded in Zionist propaganda.

When Florida started its citrus industry the growers went to Palestine to learn and brought Palestinians over to get it started as they had the most profitable citrus industry in the world at the time.

Israel's own records show nearly a thousand Palestinian villages destroyed and taken over for the benefit of foreigners.

D'Israeli is but one of many sources for a population on the order of one million. In giving speeches in Parliament he was known for his exceptional preparation in the facts although did have the ability to turn them towards his argument.

Zionists invented this propaganda line to claim the Palestinians really did not own the land and were not attached to it.

However the entire issue reduces to a very simple fact. The Palestinians are people whose ancestors converted from Judaism to Islam. By your "atheist" model of who can be a Jew, the Palestinians are as much Jews as anyone else who makes the claim.

This is hardly a new idea. It is in all the history books. No place in the history books is there the least suggestion that Jews were expelled by Islamic conquerers. Conversion was either direct or via Christianity. Their ancestors were Jews. Manachem Begin openly discussed this. But he, like me, had this strange idea that a Jew was a follower of Judaism.

Unless a Jew is talking of Zionism the definition of who is a Jew always means a follower of Judaism. The only exception is for atheists who have not converted to another religion which requires conversion. Noting the exception is based upon religion those who claim to be atheists can only be Jews by virtue of accepting the religious principle of non-conversion. In other words, they accept the religion.
 

If you are gullible enough to accept mere assertion of being a Jew makes one a Jew then HARKEN TO MY WORDS. I am a Jew. I have said it therefore it is true.

=====

Thought for the day: The high priests were priests of the most high god not superior in rank. Most high god is a prefered English translation of the Upper God which is one of the gods mentioned in the OT as being worshiped by Jews.

Institutions going through the motions do not make a meaningful democratic system. It takes a responsive and responsible public just to be able to keep grips on the reality and their leadership, and US does not have that. In fact, the most powerful influences in the US are working to keep the general public away from both influence and insight into both internal and international policy.

I have studied and worked in Columbia, MD for a year of my undergraduate studies. I grew up in Bosnia, once part of Yugoslavia. I answer that since I think it's a relevant question.

I reject completely your insinuation of "conspiracy theories" and "opinionated websites", since that kind of loaded language is not an honest inquiry for reference.

Nothing is so complex, that it does not have key parameters that, in conjunction with timing and context, enable a degree of control. 9/11 is a clear example of context; actions undertaken thereafter present application of parameters with proper timing, effectively redefining complexity as just details on a larger whole. Federal government has tools at it's disposal that, although needing proper timing and context, can be used to move the whole machine half way across the world with almost no justification.

You are right that each state has it's own interest, but this is precisely what makes them voulnerable. State is dependent on a few major parameters that can readily be used in negotiations, including against the state. An example is employment. Even medium-sized businesses can put whole states in competition for jobs.

At times the whole is so fragmented that details really are all there is to be understood. However, most of the time this is not the case.

Attacking the literal meaning of something that is commonly understood as a figure of speech is a popular way of argumentation - in comedy shows. Of course I did not mean that every single "average American" would lose his job. Give me a break.

Unemployment: http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE5153B720090206

As you can see, 600k people laid off only in January. The real disturbing trend started in September 2008 with just over 300k people laid off. October just shy of 400k, and then 3 consecutive months with around 600k people fired. Every one of those jobs has effect on the community, suppliers, producers, etc. Without even looking at the way statistics are done, and CPS is interesting in it's own right, it should be clear to anyone that any static percentages of employment at this point are just attempts at raining in the rampaging chaos on the job market today.

That would be a fair question, were it not for the fact that US policy is not based on public opinion. I will just take the subject that has been "off the table" implicitly forever and explicitly after this last election: single-payer social security for all Americans, where the interest of the 'payer' is not saving on the treatment of the citizens, practically supported by almost all medical personal not employed in ensurance business and majority of population according to several polls. I am not going to argue for or against, but just remind you that a proposal similar to HR676 actually passed the assembly and went to the desk of the governor of California, supported by a large majority of population and medical personal. He vetoed it.

Again, 'rant' and 'conspiracy theory' are attempts at labeling. If you think what I say is unsupported, challenge me with arguments, not knee-jerk Dan Rather-like stuff.

First off in a rare moment of agreement with A_nony_mouse I concur that US support and involvement with Israel is not in the best interest of the United States.

Last comments on the following topics unless you wish to start a new thread as it's off track of this one.

American democracy starts in the neighborhoods affecting citizens in a very direct way. It continues into city and county governments where the majority of US citizens are affected constantly through taxes, streets, trash removal, utilities in many cases, improvements, courts, judges, licenses and zoning. The next step is the state government which handles larger projects and issues pertinent to those living in the region. The final piece is the one most observed throughout the world but generally has the least affect on a daily basis to US citizens. The US federal government is what you will notice the most in relation to America if you live elsewhere. My point was you concentrate solely on the US gov't and made a generalization from a POV globally. It did not appear that you consider the city council where considerable representative involvement occurs. This is true at many levels throughout the US. I have lived in 16 US cities in 6 states and would not presume to make a statement about how meaningful and representative governments of various levels in Georgia or Iowa are today as I have little personal knowledge. I would also not make such a statement about your country either.

I made my comment regarding you infer conspiracy theories as you asserted "They hold democratic elections, yet they have nothing to do with your idea of democracy. Same with the US governmental system." So you must have studied all levels of government in each of our 50 states, all of our counties, and all of our cities to know that we have dysfunctional democracy in the US. Or you have a study from someone that has done this extensive research in Orlando, Florida, Atlanta, Georgia, Las Vegas, Nevada and Las Vegas, New Mexico and everywhere else on multiple levels of government.  If not, your claim that US democracy is not even half as bad as yours is an assertion or speculation. 

The American people are not all Bush clones and the next 4 years will hopefully show you that. In all fairness Afghanistan is fortunate to still exist after 9/11. The US people are quite capable of anything when someone wrongs us as we perceive it including vaporizing an entire country. That this did not occur even under Bush/Cheney is very fortunate. I don't think you really understand how ingrained and interwoven we are with our right to exist our way.

The intent of fragmentation was purposeful to our way of life and serves it well. True large companies can cause competition between states for jobs and economical development. But states can also refuse to allow certain things such as when Colorado voted the Winter Olympics out. Or in California when auto emissions requirements were forced on auto makers. Perhaps California will vote to allow pot to be readily sold and force a states rights issue with the federal government as California needs the money.

My point was your language was overly dramatic in inference. No one doubts that there are large losses of jobs in the US. This and several other economic changes in the US has caused a ripple effect throughout the world. There's a thread for discussing what caused the economic crisis where this is more appropriate.

You said:

1)Oil price is high - they earn money & you can't get to work.

2)Threat of terrorism - they sent the National Guard  overseas

3)Economy collapsing - they are celebrating largest bonuses & draining the Treasury.

4)Real estate going under - they buy low rent houses to tear down.

5)New Jersey under water - they use reparation funds for golf courts.

6)Economy going under - they are ready to decimate the last resistance of the working class.

Who exactly are they? The way you used it was in the fashion of a conspiracy which is why I asked.

When did New Jersey go under water? Are you talking the future from global warming? . I live in Florida, someday it will be an island. Closer drive to the beach.

In the case of exorbitant oil prices caused by commodity speculators who went unchecked in world markets I know who they are. Hopefully many lost their ass last fall.

I still see no definition of a western interest in the support of Israel.

Please try again.

I don't think we agree on what defines western interest at all. Pretty hard to continue with the argument, if your definition of western interest per default excludes interest in Israeli govt and military. That is contrary to what western interest themselves think, evidently, since they are invested in the state and support it broadly and explicitly.

Is everyone in our half of the world just gone crazy and supports Israel for no reason? Or does your definition of western interest exclude some key elements?

It is not a matter of whether we agree or disagree on what constitutes a western interest.

You have not presented a single thing which could be agreed with or disagreed with as a benefit to the west.

You simply are not saying anything substantive.

If I am in error please take the opportunity to present something which is substantive.

And it's Japan who sold the stereo, while America was selling the latest military technology. Yeah, no-one dies from a stereo.

You also have the situation generally ass-up. The cold war was functionally a method for selling military technology. The cold war propped up the soviet union. It gave it a reason to survive as long as it did. And having a tarted up third world country as the enemy was good for sales. You could develop the tech and deploy with a possibility to use it. There was always a pseudo-threat that meant military funding. That's what the war scare of 1948 was all about, setting the foundations for the military-industrial complex. The Commies were good for the economy and great for manipulating the population, because they could invade at any time. The food lines got longer and the gerontocracy got more ensconced. But they could make some nifty things with chewing gum and match sticks.

What? Another enemy was being sought out to take the place of the soviet union. You've gotta have a reason to spend defense money. Nobody in power wanted peace.

National security was never really the issue. It was always the money. Big money. Selling the last generation weapons around the world. Getting big defense grants. Developing new weapons and the cycle is perpetuated. There's more money involved in selling tanks to a third world country than selling stereos. It's always about economics.

Just to be clear, 9/11 was retaliation.

The CIA were in bed with the ayatollahs during the late 1950s and paying the extremist Arabs in Egypt to stir up trouble. You can see the potential for blow-back. They picked some winners there, didn't they? Even went on to pick Osama bin Laden. Instead of supporting liberal Arabs, they subverted them for the most unstable elements in the Arab world. It was the CIA who brought young Saddam Hussein back to Iraq at the start of the 1960s.

While the CIA had betrayed the democratic elements of the Arab world, the military was seen as being able to bomb whoever they wanted back to the stone age. Before the genocide at Hiroshima, Curtis Lemay had flattened most Japanese cities, not just strategic targets but anything that had walls. This was the procedure: while Americans were safe, protected by oceans on both sides, those deemed as enemies were subjected to bombings. Korea was bombed to shit. Vietnam was bombed to shit and poor Cambodia that did nothing was bombed to shit. And on it went. We basically had to wait until the Soviet army got sucked into Afghanistan to get a similar approach from another power. Americans had never felt the havoc that they caused from many thousands of feet up, until 9/11 gave them a small taste.

Oh, what drivel.

Don't fuck with us, alright. We want your resources. We are going to bankrupt you, hand you over to the military to mismanage you, then they'll sell your resources to us for peanuts.

Iraq is about resources. Afghanistan's got nothing, so while the links to 9/11 were to Afghanistan there was no real desire to do anything about Afghanistan because it was wasted effort. The military access in Tajikistan and the like is an attempt at a foot in the door of Russia's sphere of resources.

Not China. China is in the process of pushing the American economy over the edge. It was the geriatric Reagan who was responsible for putting the process in operation with his rampant debt. China is one of the biggest creditors. Strangle China? You must be joking. China has its hands in America's deepest pockets.

You really think military in Latin America is about Russia or China!? LOL.

Actually it is just what we signed up for. These politicians were democratically elected, weren't they? George W. Bush was elected twice! You'd think the electorate would have been gored enough the first time round, but no.

spin

"but there will always be a bully out there that wants to challenge our right to exist our way."

Um, yeah. I really, REALLY do not think that the US specifically, or the West in general, faces an external threat powerful enough to warrant defense budgets that Cold War-era Defense Secretarys would go gaga over. In fact, I will go on record and say that that idea is complete bullshite. I will also go record and say that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and thus far there is zero evidence of an uber-powerul external threat. It is up to those who claim there is to provide evidence for it, and to date, there has been none provided.

Think about that for a moment.

I can piteously see you saluting the flag aged 5 and kissing J.Edgar Hoover's butt. This stuff is outlandishly sick and hypocritical. "[O]ur right to exist our way"? How many countries have fallen victim to not being able to exist their way? A few highlights:

Iran 1953,

Iraq 1963,

Vietnam,

Cambodia,

Guatemala,

Indonesia,

Iraq (and Iran war),

Afghanistan 1979-92,

Nicaragua,

Iraq 1990-1 (April Glaspie),

El Salvador,

Panama,

Venezuela (still no Sth American country can exist their way),

Iraq 2002-

And a host of others. Talking about the bully of the world. One could add the permanent war on Cuba. There were clandestine operations against communists in numerous European countries. There was support for rights-violating dictators all around the world. The stuff about democracy is only really manipulation of the dumber Americans, because there has been almost no support of democracy around the world in the last fifty years.

That's why torture has become so popular in the spy and military business. "If some other states don't have principles why should we?"

Clinton played it safe. But cut the other crap. You're s'posed to be a skeptic, for chrissake.

spin

I don't usually post links, but please watch these couple of seconds before you read further. This is Madeleine Albright back in 1996, interviewed about vicious collective punishment of Iraqi people by the "international community": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4

Now imagine any diplomat in the universe saying the same about 500.000 American children and decide what a decent person is to think about US government. A simple definition of terrorism is: Threat or use of violence against innocent civilians for political purposes. The only way your and mine countries aren't terrorist states, is if we include a clause in the definition: "unless we do it, then it's counter-terrorism".

With this in mind, I will now comment the quoted part of your post:

1) Israel does have a valuable resource - medium range nuclear missiles and the strongest military in the middle east. Just like US policy makers are pushing for missiles in Poland and Check Republic, they have the same interest in having a strongarmed regime in middle east, completely loyal to their leaders in US.

2) They have a factory that makes soldiers who operate US supplied advanced military equipment. At the same time the public US money given to Israel comes back to private dealers in the US in form of no-bid contracts or to support different political organisations.

3) Agree, we get diamonds off the bloodied corpses of the population of Congo.

4) US is currently outsourcing 70-80% of it's intelligence to private corporations. Israeli intelligence agencies are some of the best in the world, know the area and are an invaluable resource for US policy makers. US policy makers do not care about jobs in the US, they would actually like nothing better than third world country situation in the US in general. Something like Indonesia would be the perfect model for a military society - obedient and willing to kill on command. That is why there is no money for a comprehensive single payer solution for healthcare, while there is quite enough for the supporters of the terrorist regime in Washington.

5) US oil supply is quite safe. Antagonism is a message - we own the world and have the right to assert our dominance anywhere. The actual gain is destabilisation and weakening of the region until such a time when meaningful dominance can be asserted. The general US population are spectators with little to no influence. Ordinary US citizens are there to give the lives of their children, while otherways keeping quiet.

Anyone who reads an honest history book will conclude that US policy makers are enforcers of a system just as vicious and dangerous as any empire - only bigger, stronger and correspondingly more ruthless and dangerous. US leaders have no love for their subjects either and will not tolerate living standards that might allow ordinary US citizens a moment of rest and a chance to contemplate their position. There is nothing to wait and see.

And somehow you think that US citizens agree with this?? I didn't and still don't.

And just how does this relate to the US citizens?? You quoted how I said the US citizens don't see valuable resources and come back talking about US policymakers and medium range missiles. Just what do I get for Israel having medium missiles when I go to the supermarket?

The missiles the US wants to put in Poland are anti-missile missiles like in Alaska to protect you and yours in Europe from alleged Iranian missiles. Perhaps y'all should do it yourselves which is my suggestion. Pay your own way and protect your own ass.

I think you have a problem in separating the US military-industrial complex from the US citizens. Really, we are a fun people into porn, sex, drugs and religion unfortunately. Our first concern is usually getting laid not having an overseas war machine in Israel or anywhere else. We like to buy new high tech stuff for home use and anything else that can make us happy. A factory making soldiers to operate equipment we paid for only costs us more taxes and makes it harder to buy a new HDTV.

And the Israelis polish and cut them in competition to say Amsterdam.

You are a one track mind. I was speaking about US citizens not US policymakers.  The only thing Israel really does that matters to a regular US citizen is software and electronics that could be done here. They therefore steal jobs from us. 

Not my fault man. Again, from the point of view of US citizens antagonism interferes with our lifestyle. Thanks to the last oil and gas price run up, we will likely free ourselves from the intimidation caused by import. It may take 20-25 years but a trend has started that is unlikely to change. We don't trust the exporters or the oil companies because you interfered with our lifestyle. Mass transit is actually being used and trips are being planned.

You seem to notice there is a world wide economic slowdown? Consider that when we had to pay 2 or 3 times the cost for gas we had no cash left to buy shit. The slowdown is not just from bad mortgages and loans. People couldn't continue to pay both. So, what was that about US population being spectators? We voted at the store by not buying shit. Look where that got you.

As to giving the lives of our children, A_nony_mouse and friends are working to automate warfare so they can kill people from Nevada and never risk lives. I hope this doesn't cause more incidents that fuel attitudes like yours. I would construct them for defense for the US and leave the rest of you on your own.

I personally would like the US to back off, stop playing world wide policeman, arbitrator and leave most of you to your own devices. Pay your own way. You can also start paying us back for the Marshall plan from World War 2. Maybe it's time to become isolationist  America again like after World War 1. 

I understand you have a lot of resentment pent up, sorry. I think you lack understanding of us and misinterpret. I disagree that US leaders are as you say. By the way, we are not subjects as this isn't a kingdom, though you may have got that idea over the last 8 years under George W.

One expects they would fight back but it is not rational they, as thieves, should be granted sympathy and understanding. You might be on their side and cheer them on but that means they are still murderers and thieves.

And as a matter of fact, those who did arrive with the explicit intention to steal the land and enslave the natives, the Spanish and Portuguese, do not get any sympathy today. Even if you want to look at the English endevor, these days we cheer when the Indians shoot Gene Autrey.

The myth of expulsion was first debunked in the 4th c. AD. They were never expelled. Whoever left did so voluntarily. Those who remained largely converted to other, more civilized religions.

There is a simple truth, the land was not the UN's to give. 

Of course they are nuts. That out of the way, you have still presented no benefit to the US or the west to supporting Israel.

I said the only common reason for support of Israel is religion. I can point to the common acceptance in the US of the "judeo-christian" heresy. I can point to 40-60 million US born again rednecks who swear their support of Israel for biblical reasons and who are the foundation of the Republican party. There are tens of millions of others who simply subscribe to the heresy.

You have presented no alternative to religion.

You are not unusual. Izziehuggers have been making claims of undefined mystical importance of Israel to the west almost from the beginning of Zionism. First it was as a colony bringing European enlightenment as the Brits had done for India. When that became discredited the Izziehuggers worked to turn the US against the Arabs to secure a place for themselves in the Cold War. However they never had a problem with spying on the West and selling to the Soviet Block when there was money involved. Pollard is the horrible example of that treachery.

And now that the Cold War is over and Israel has lost what trivial value it might have had over its liabilities they mystical nature of the value of Israel is all that is left.

Rational people laugh.