Posted on 02/25/2002 2:14:43 PM PST by RCW2001
American Aid to Israel:
Is It Good for the Jews?
by Derek Copold
Some years ago a Jewish friend of mine met a man who worked for AIPAC, a political action committee that lobbies on behalf of the State of Israel. Judging by my friend’s reaction to him, I gathered that he was quite the salesman. The AIPAC worker had talked my friend into contributing, and that same friend, knowing my father was Jewish, thought I too might be interested. I wasn’t.
My friend was a bit put out when I declined the oppoturnity, and I felt bad at the time, having brought him down a bit. But the fact of the matter was that I didn’t, and still don’t, care for the idea of Americans lobbying our government for the purpose of sending tax money to a foreign power, even an ostensibly friendly one like Israel.
This is not to imply that my friend bore within him the seeds of disloyalty. Quite the opposite. A Vietnam veteran, he proudly served 12 years in the armed forces. Even if I disagree with his political choice, it doesn’t change the fact that he loves his country through and through.
His evident discomfort, though, raised a question. Are AIPAC and other Israel-boosting organizations in the United States doing any good when they help procure billions and billions of dollars of free aid for the Jewish State? And I ask this, not so much in relation to the United States, but rather to Israel itself, and to Jews in general.
Before answering this question, allow me to also note a twist in this situation. Most of Israel’s supporters in America hail from the political Right. Ironically, many of the people who denounce government money as a corrupting influence will, in almost the same breath, demand that Israel continue to receive her cut. So which is it? Are government subsidies bad, as is claimed for welfare recipients, charities and corporations, or are they good, as is argued for Israel?
The evidence suggests the former. Before the late 1960s, Israel was for the most part a self-sufficient country. Despite being surrounded by hostile forces, she was able to take care of herself without relying on any other power for direct aid. This status changed once she began to accept American aid. As a result of this ‘free’ money’, the Jewish State has become an American dependency. The once proud Zionist nation has been reduced to relying on the charity of Washington.
The number of visits Israel’s Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, has made to Washington in the last year alone attests to Israel’s servile status. Many of Israel’s boosters proudly point to Ariel Sharon’s four White House visits as a sign of favor, an accomplishment. But how can any supposedly independent country take heart in the fact that their leader has been forced to show up at another nation’s doorstep, hat in hand, humbly asking permission to do what it believes it must do to survive? Far from securing Israel's independence, America's aid has effectively destroyed it.
So much for helping Israel. But what about the Jews in general and American Jews in particular? Is America’s aid to Israel good for the Jews?
Again, the answer is not encouraging. American aid to Israel has been cited as a factor that led to the 9/11 massacre. For the moment, set aside the question of whether this allegation is true or not; simply note that it is there. Note also, that most Jews, understandably, take severe umbrage with it, and have gone to extraordinary lengths to rebut it. Now whether or not they are correct, their efforts, including the often inaccurate cries of anti-Semitism, have raised questions (most of which remain unspoken) amongst their non-Jewish compatriots about whose interests the Jews are really serving.
To be sure, these Jews believe completely and sincerely that the United States’ interests coincide with Israel’s, and though I question their logic, I don’t doubt their loyalty.
Yet the question is out there, and having that question of ‘dual loyalty’, which is inseparably tied to Israel's American aid, remain out there is deleterious to the Jews. If Israel had never accepted American largesse and remained self-sufficient, no one could have raised this question. Either there would be no terrorism directed against America, as Israel’s critics believe would happen, or if it did, there would be no aid for those critics to blame.
So if this aid is as harmful as I claim it to be, why do Israel and her friends insist on continuing it? For the same reason a heroine addict keeps looking for smack, even after he realizes that it’s killing him. Like that addict, Israel will do everything and anything to maintain a steady supply, and just like any junkie, she will never truly control her own destiny as long as she allows herself to be injected with billions of dollars of American aid.
Unfortunately, her American friends, particularly those on the Right, have suspended their better judgment, and they refuse to address this problem in any kind of an honest manner, preferring instead to revel in alternating emotions of triumphalism and self-pity. Meanwhile, the object of their affections becomes more and more enervated by their 'help.'
Anyone who accuses Veronica, DennisW; etc., of skinhead or skinhead activities is no supporter of Israel or the Jews (except maybe Saul Alinsky).
To accuse people who want to prevent a second holocaust of being skinheads; i.e., violent neo Nazis, is another old canard I hear about how Jews have turned into Nazis, especially with Israel.
I guess when Alinsky pulled this tactic it was to shock his opponents into a stupor by the chutzpah of the remarks. I wonder if that's your reason?
You're kidding . . . Right? Please tell me that you ARE kidding!
You cannot seriously be suggeting that the door to Israeli friendship passes through AND ONLY THROUGH Denny, Roni, Lent et al! . . . That by lacking the endorsements of that pack one is anti-Semitic . . . That showing disgust with the tactics of the pack is anti-Semitic??? Please!!! Good night.
What I say is that such people as yourself who smear the people I mentioned as Nazis with an odd tonsorial fashion (skinheads) is no friend of the Jews. Such a person is probably saying such smears so as to bait and stupify his opposition.
I don't know whether you tried to distort what I said about the application of your smear campaign into blind loyalty by venality or ignorance, but it's way too late in the evening (actually morning) to try to figure it out now.
Hard to argue with that. Why would a conservative not agree with this statement?
Nice try!
Veronica, Lent, BenF, dennisw . . . SMOOCHES!!!
Ideals For Conservatives?
Is there something mechanical you do with this? I'm not sure what pinging is or how a message reaches people not on the board.
The author is not sugggesting Israel be "thrown to the wolves", but that Israel be allowed to defend itself without American interference. If America hadn't intervened starting in 1967, Israel could have conquored and held onto more land. They would have the oil fields of the Sinai today. While the US aid is generous and appreciated, nothing is free and Israel has had to pay a heavy price for the aid. Something the Jew-haters in FR refuse to acknowledge.
Thanks, but I don't bother with Phil anymore. He isn't worth my time.
Exactly correct.
And if we grant the rectitude of your post, then it is precisely as I have been saying:
Let Israel stand on their own; let's keep our noses out of it if Israel nukes the Arabs into oblivion.
Good post on your part; at least you are learning. You shall continue to be taught.
Not by you.
Yeah, and when are they going to stop controlling the banks, media, and using the blood of Christians in their matzos?
My comment was dripping with sarcasm but it certainly put yours in context.
Not really something over which you have any genuine control.
If I care to, I can flag a post to you whenever I wish. And you will probably read it, if only for curiosity's sake.
And.... Since my viewpoints are generally the result of a pretty rigorous ethical calculation, they're usually the morally correct view of the situation. (Logic is pretty mathematical. There are always "Right" moral answers and they can be arrived at in a pretty calculated fashion).
And.... On your brighter days, you will be fortunate enough to notice that my view is correct -- whether you personally much like it or not. And that realization will "rub off" on you (even as it has just now in your own #50 -- I extend my congratulations, you have made progress today!).
So, as I said, this isn't really something over which you have any control.
Best,
OP
Sure I have.
You sound frankly like a punk.
Probably true. I like Social Distortion's rendition of Ring of Fire every bit as well as Johnny Cash's original, and Social D are certainly punk.
As far as genres go, though, I've always considered myself more metallic than punk.
But I don't dispute the charge.
You need to be taught some manners, and history, and common sense. 55 posted on 2/27/02 12:25 PM Pacific by scratchgolfer
Not a criticism I can take to heart, unfortunately.
I have many flaws -- many flaws -- but in each of the three areas you mention, I am vastly superior to my generational "norm"... or for that matter, the prevailing norms among all generations of Americans presently alive. (though that is no great boast; Twentieth Century public schooling has not made "beating the average" in the areas of "manners, and history, and common sense" particularly difficult, to be frank).
That's no arrogant self-congratulation on my part, it's just a simple fact which I know to be true. Take it as you like.
Best,
OP
Don't flatter yourself. I have always had the position that nothing is free and that American support of Israel comes with an expensive price tag.
So, as I said, this isn't really something over which you have any control.
Your attitude precludes my learning anything from you. Now, if you want to learn something about whether or not I have control over learning from you, please continue in your current vein. You will learn how quickly I can ignore someone. If you want confirmation of this, just ask PhilV.
In which case, it's a little odd that you would go into a conniption fit over my statement "Let Israel stand on their own. Let's keep our noses out of it if Israel nukes the Arabs into oblivion." Your response to that statement was,
Passing strange.
After all, my reasoning for saying "Let Israel stand on their own; Let's keep our noses out of it if Israel nukes the Arabs into oblivion" is simply to agree with the idea "that Israel be allowed to defend itself without American interference. If America hadn't intervened starting in 1967, Israel could have conquored and held onto more land. They would have the oil fields of the Sinai today".
So if this - "American support of Israel comes with an expensive price tag" - a position which "you have always held", that's all to the good. It just makes your vehemently oppositional response to my statement, "Let Israel stand on their own; Let's keep our noses out of it if Israel nukes the Arabs into oblivion", seem awfully short-tempered.
See what I am saying?
Nope. I guess I just can't learn from you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.