Israel?

Let me ask you this question about our relationship with Israel. The question is prompted by a comment regarding Mr. Murtha's well reasoned suggestions for how our military presence in the mid-East should be adjusted.

What has been suggested is that we withdraw from Iraq, which everyone knows, and then to maintain a strong force in the region, which not so many people seem to have noticed. This presence would include marines housed at sea, right over the horizon. I don't have any problem with that.

Now, here's the question, where, pray tell, will we station these redeployed troops? How about this - why don't we have a mega force deployed in Israel? Why don't we have a force located right smack dab in the middle of Israel with the full shooting match on board - everything right down to Nukes. After all, Israel is our friend, our soul-mate, our sister in mutual protection, and needless to mention the recipient of hundreds of billions of dollars of our aid over the years. They should welcome us, should they not?

check out how much isreal respect the US military:

http://www.ussliberty.org/

PB

:rofl:

60's we toss a Jewish Supreme Court Justice because he wrote an article for playboy, and then the GOP stage the first filibuster of a USSC nominee because - why - perhaps he is Jewish?

The anti- Israel feelings, purchased by Arab oil money, were not not only purchased in the UN General Assembly, but also purchased in the US State Dept and Defense Department.

The USS Liberty story has never had the two versions reconciled - each side says the other are liars - and the only thing agreed to is the fact that it was a horrible mistake.

I'm not anti-Israel although my views on the issue are more pro-Palestinian than center of public discourse in this country. But while I think Israel has been legitimately threatened many times throughout it's history and has a right to defend itself, the Suez Crisis was imperial aggression in which Israel acted as a lackey for the British and the French.

Ike's response to that was one of his greatest moments. And accusing him of anti-Semitism for making Israel (and Britain and France) turn back is dead wrong.

The link to the "What really happened" story is from the James Ennes -Alison Weir web site (altho on the Liberty, Ennes turned up in the Joe Corsi-John O'Neill "Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth" organization) James Ennes is a not so innocent dupe of the Chief Of Naval Intelligence's deadly spin machine.

According to Federal Judge (and retired Navy Captain) A. Jay Cristol and USS Pueblo CO Lloyd Bucher, the cover up was a coverup to protect the bureaucracy of the Chief of Naval Intelligence.

The Chief of Naval Intelligence screwed up Liberty - didn't tell the operating forces or the Israelis that Liberty was there, even denied that it was there. Chief of Naval Intelligence put out a cover story that the ship was a "false flagged Russian ship" and then another cover story that the ship was a "false flagged Egyptian troop carrier."

Then, just eight short months later the Chief of Naval Intelligence screwed up Pueblo the same way - didn't tell the operating forces, or the South Koreans or the Japanese that Pueblo was there.

The "truth" about Liberty is in both:
1. CAPT A. Jay Cristol, "The Liberty Incident"
2. CDR Lloyd Bucher, "Bucher:My Story"
and also alluded to in the report on Pueblo.


Why am I so concerned -- BECAUSE MY LATE FATHER WAS A NAVAL INTELLIGENCE OFFICER IN WORLD WAR 2. IN 1945 MY DAD'S "NAVAL INTELLIGENCE" RECON PBY CATALINA WAS LOST AT SEA - AND THE INTELLIGENCE TYPES SAID THAT HE AND HIS CREW WERE IN AUSTRALIA. IT WAS PURE SERENDIPITY - AND A GREATER FORCE - THAT HE AND HIS CREW WERE SIGHTED AND SAVED BY ANOTHER US SHIP -- THE INTELLIGENCE ASSHOLES SAID HE WAS IN AUSTRALIA ---UNTIL HE AND HIS CREW MADE IT BACK TO THE TENDER.

So, if you are going to cite Ennes (as in Corsi, Ennes, Allison Weir, Paul Findley) - you should at least read CAPT A. Jay Cristol, "The Liberty Incident" and CDR Lloyd Bucher, "Bucher:My Story"
and also alluded to in the report on Pueblo.

Your interest in national defense and the sea services is appreciated.

"Coastie"
Lieutenant, United States Coast Guard (Honorably Discharged)
by direction

makes Israel so important to the US defense. We can not trust Muslim governments to let us have long term leases - heck - the Saudi's kicked us out a while back after we sunk a few billion into Saudi bases.

and then ask the question again.

Kuwait:

"We ... have united the Iraqis against us. And so I'm convinced, once we redeploy to Kuwait or to the surrounding area, that it will be much safer. They won't be able to unify against the United States. And then, if we have to go back in, we can go back in."

"Now, when I say redeploy our troops, I'm talking about to Kuwait, if they allow us to redeploy there, to Okinawa where we can be over the horizon, go back in, in case there's more terrorist activity. "

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec05/withdrawal_11-17.html

leave women out of it.

it's like when politicians want to go all patriotic they call america her/she

does wonders for the 'stability of the region', doesn't it? :crazy:

israel really likes the fact the US military is fighting a proxy war for it, but they're not ready to house them.

1. The Saudi Royal Family (Craig Unger, "House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties"), and

2. ExxonMobil, TexacoChevron, PhillipsConoco, BPAmoco, Oxy, Shell, Halliburton, etc. (F. William Engdahl, "A Century Of War : Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order")

that do wonders for the stability of the region.

BTW - click on for some other things that have done wonders for the stability of the region.

and this thread was specifically about Israel (in fact, I think the thread title was 'Israel').

Although I can't back up my comment with detail or evidence on this website for fear of being called an anti-semite, or having my posts deleted.

:shrug:

Any military action or attack launched from Israel would immediately inflame the entire middle east, and would be disavowed by all other Arab governments, even friendly ones, like Jordan and Egypt. So we are in the ironic position of not being able to use our "ally". That's why instead of relying on US force, we have had to build Israel into an independent force to protect itself.

Any US force in the middle east has to be based in an Arab or Muslim country in order to have legitimacy and the capacity actually to be used.

All I ever hear is how Israel is our only friend in the middle-east. Well, all I know is that before the creation of Israel, we had no enemies in the middle-east!
Also, our MSM and US foreighn policy is so biased toward them, {israel} that I have to get my mid-east coverage from sources like "the London Guardian" & other European sources.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

They already have enough problems convincing the Arabs that they aren't just an American puppet government. Having US troops on their soil would effectively end any chance they have to be seen as a legitimate nation by the Arab states.

Besides, Israel doesn't completely trust us anyway. Look up the USS Liberty or the continuing debate over Jonathan Pollard. The Israelis may enjoy our financial support, but they're still a Jewish nation and it is well understood there how America treated the Jews during WWII. They also understand that America will do whatever is in America's best interest, and if our interests ever run contrary to Israels, they can't count on us to side with them.

And look up the write up about the USS Liberty in CDR Lloyd Bucher, "Bucher:My Story" -- the other spy ship where the Chief of Naval Intelligence lied like a effin rug to cover his own butt.


Your interest in national defense and the sea services is appreciated.

"Coastie"
Lieutenant, United States Coast Guard (Honorably Discharged)
by direction

will happen. Many if not most of those troops will be repositioned in West Africa. Some will go to the new base(s) in Paraguay. Some, mostly national guard, will return to the US. Many will be involved in Psy-Ops and some will stay in Iraq as to train the so-called Iraqi forces. This means death squads, disappearances. Air bombings in Iraq will pick up considerably. The war will fade from view somewhat as the violence increases in Iraq. The gloves are really going to come off.

The Pentagon wants to limit the number of uber-active troops from returning to the States so as to obscure the amount of damage that has been done to the psyches of many.

hired through a chain of "brass plates" (shame companies with office addresses on Caribbean Islands and Gulf Islands)

...and it's not exactly a spacious country.

I suspect your question is facetious anyway, but why is a huge permanent US force in the area a necessity?

dup'd from a recent similar thread in GD:politics...

this would be disastrous:

- it would be overt confirmation of the Muslim claim that the US and Israel are two heads of the same Beast.

- it would be better for both Israel and the US if the two countries were clearly shown to be independent entities who cooperate, but are not part of a Crusader conspiracy, or a co-dependent relationship unassailable by even the best Freudian from Park Avenue. This of course is diametrically opposed to the PNAC strategy of unifying the two nations' foreign policies. (Which strategy I doubt has the universal support of the people or politicians of Israel, PNAC instead are shills and cohorts of particular political factions there. For example, I doubt that Mr. Sharon is particularly enamored of their nonresident bombast, it's easy to break wind and theorize when you're 5000 miles away from the action and don't need to worry when you head for the grocery store in your SUV.)

- cost in one place is no different than cost in another

- Israel is geostrategically problematic - hard to defend, already has security problems, long range from the current center of the action. You might as well put up a mile-wide bullseye with an arrow pointing to it and a big sign that says "bomb here now, double your fun". No gain for the US.

- Israel already has a near-crippling security situation. It should be free to address it without the added burden of worrying about big brother's force protection issues.

The unavoidable answer is that our long term strategy must be to address the reasons for our engagement in the middle east (our antiquated petroleum-based economy) and the resultant resentment of us by the residents of that region. We do not have the "right" to soil ourselves and the rest of the world because we cannot discipline our consumption habits and instead engage in flatulent delusions that productivity and concomitant resource use can increase infinitely. Being positive doesn't change physical reality. We need to disengage ourselves economically so that we can disengage ourselves militarily, in a deep long-term way, and then return to address the inequities wrought by 300 years of resource colonialism.

Stationed in Israel, in a couple of bases. No "mega-force", but they are there.

Please review I/P Guidelines when posting new threads.



Thank you.

Undergroundrailroad
I/P Moderator
I/P Forum Affairs