Replies

Why should this be? Why should Republicans remain steadfast when they receive so little for their fidelity? If you prefer an analysis on other than partisan grounds, why should the United States risk terrorist strikes because of its support for a nation of 4 million to 8 million people with virtually no oil against hundreds of millions of Arabs with oceans of oil?
Because Islamists hate us for a host of reasons unrelated to Israel and showing our weakness by surrending friends invites attack.

Is it thrall to the Israeli lobby? Is it thrall to the evangelicals with an eschatological obsession? Is it a commitment to a capitalist democracy? Is it a commitment to a socialist democracy? What do we get out of it?
If by Israel lobby you mean that vast majority of American cities, um yes.
And Socialists? I suppose, but so are we. And Israel is becomming less socialist every month.

Do we remain in support of Israel because we have always been in support of Israel and simply cannot extricate ourselves? Why does the left today reject our commitment to Israel which for decades had been a cornerstone of the Democrat platform?
Always in what?
In 1948, we recorgnized Israel, then banned arms sales to Israel, while that Arabs had American and British weapons. Some support.
In 1956, we betrayed Britain and France just to screw Israel and protect the Arab Socialists, who still went Soviet, because they were ideological bent on this, regardless of the anticolonialist delusion of the schmuck behind "Atoms for Peace" and operation Keephaul.

We protected the PLO in the 1980s, and the price of getting Syrian support to help liberal Kuwait was forcing Israel to betray Lebanese Christians and put Hizbollah on their borders. Shall I continue with our support, or will you admitt that the claim of always is silly error?

Have American Jews become so secular they are indifferent to the fate of Israel? If so, does that explain why very few American Jews shift their allegiance to the Republican Party in the wake of the Democrats turning against Israel? Is there a visceral dislike of Christians in the American Jewish community which that community identifies with the Republican Party which is so deep that it overcomes their commitment to support for Israel?
25% of Jews don't care of Israel. Of this group 80% are Democrats. Many other Jews care about Israel, but desperately want peace.

If fidelity to an ally requires us to expend billions of dollars and risk nuclear war, does that mean we should continue to spend billions of dollars and risk nuclear war on behalf of South Korea and Taiwan? Do these commitments make us stronger, weaker, more or less vulnerable? Do we apply the same standards to all of our allies irrespective of the power of their lobbies in Washington?
The only time we risked nuclear war for Israel was 1973.
And selling out Israel won't make us any less vulnerable. We are dealing with lunatics. Bin Ladin blame the US for Serbia "atrocities" and Russian atrocities in Chechnya.

I'm more than happy to discuss this in a non-PC manner, so long as we are dealing with facts.

Because Islamists hate us for a host of reasons unrelated to Israel

Yes but do they hate us for reasons related to Israel? If so, would rationalizing our relationship with Israel reduce the hatred and reduce the risk?

showing our weakness by surrending friends invites attack

Why do we think that rationalizing our obligations toward Israel constitutes "surrendering" our allies? After all, Israel has won every war it as fought and it alone among its immediate neighbors is possessed of nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. Does the same logic about inviting attack apply to Taiwan, South Korea?

If by Israel lobby you mean that vast majority of American cities, um yes.

I'm not clear on your meaning, but what is your view of the power of the Israeli lobby to influence foreign policy? This is not and illegitimate question it is being asked, for example, about our relationship with Cuba being influenced by Cuban Americans. In the past it was alleged that our relationship with China was affected by the "China lobby." As someone with partial Irish blood, I am very well aware of century long history of American politicians twisting the British lion's tail. The influence of the Israeli lobby is unquestionably strong, some would say the strongest in the nation, others would put it behind the NRA etc. but the point remains, the Israeli lobby influences our foreign policy and the subject should be addressed because it is not fair to subject Americans to the risk of terrorist nuclear attack without airing the issue.

Of course I can concede that our support for Israel has had its ebbs and surges but the overall course has been in support Israel even to court nuclear war with the Soviet Union as you point out in 1973. I cannot imagine a degree of support stronger than that except to actually engage in nuclear war on behalf of an ally. Unquestionably, Obama and the hard left are not fully in support of Israel and they would probably turn away from her entirely if it were politically feasible domestically. I will not admit that it is a "silly error" referring to our long history of support with the word "always". It is unquestionable that in the eyes of the world and in the eyes of the American domestic electorate America is inextricably identified with Israel. That includes the eyes of the Arab and Muslim world.

I have yet to hear what we get out of our support of Israel.

If we abandon our support for Israel tomorrow, why would that be "selling out" Israel? Why do we owe Israel anything? I have no doubt that we would still have some problems with the Muslim world if we abandon our support of Israel, but, "dealing with the facts," do you have any factual evidence that that is true? Michael Scheurer, for example, sees our problem with terrorism to be of our own making, part of which is our support for Israel.

You and d-fendr are the posters who replied with facts. I applaud you for that.