If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Times of Israel)   Israel to US: 'Dude, Iran isn't even scared of you. You should go over and like totally bust that ass, bro"   (timesofisrael.com) divider line 186
    More: Followup, United States, Iran, military intelligences, Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, NPT, nonproliferation, Iranian nuclear, Iranian nuclear program  
•       •       •

2739 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Aug 2012 at 10:33 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



186 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-18 08:50:46 PM
Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

*looks at a map*

meh. not our problem.
 
2012-08-18 08:59:04 PM

Weaver95: Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

*looks at a map*

meh. not our problem.


Sorry, its your problem

Feb5, 2012 Obama's Dilemma: how to dissuade Israel from bombing Iran without alienating pro-Israeli voters in November. So, the Obama admin has told Israel that the U.S. won't support an attack on Iran... quietly (247)

March 3, 2012 "Netanyahu is expected to publicly harden his line against Iran during a meeting with Barack Obama." ( •_•)⌐■-■ Well, that might stiffen into into a.... (⌐■_■) sticky situation ((443)

March 10, 2012 When Netanyahu gave Obama the Book of Esther as a gift, the message was only slightly less subtle than if he had constructed a massive neon billboard with the message "Mr. President, please help me destroy Iran before they destroy us" (235)

March 21, 2012 Experts: "rising demand for oil around the world and supply concerns stemming from Iran sanctions are driving prices at the pump" (152)

June 14, 2012 Romney-bot installs Mid East policy firmware. "Policy toward Israel will be guided by Israeli leaders; second, on Jerusalem, he'd do whatever Israel tells him to do" (103)

July 29, 2012 Romney to Israel: "If you guys want to go ahead and bomb Iran, I got your back" (293)
 
2012-08-18 09:00:29 PM
See? Fartbongo made us look weak and pathetic! Vote for a REAL man, one who will show the world who's boss by bombing the shiat out of it.
 
2012-08-18 09:01:56 PM
Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.
 
2012-08-18 09:24:34 PM
We keep offering Iran a choice and they always pick cake. We're going to run out of cake at this rate.
 
2012-08-18 09:30:54 PM
Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

I simply don't care. Fight your own wars.
 
2012-08-18 09:48:44 PM
Yup, vote for Romney because there are plenty of countries in the Mid East yet to be invaded on the behest of Israel.
 
2012-08-18 09:51:30 PM

themindiswatching: Vote for a REAL man.


If only there was one running.
 
2012-08-18 09:54:59 PM

jaylectricity: themindiswatching: Vote for a REAL man.

If only there was one running.


There is only one running.
 
2012-08-18 09:59:23 PM

GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.

Lionel Mandrake: Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

I simply don't care. Fight your own wars.


You guys should ask someone to read the article aloud for you. And slowly.

And don't be afraid to ask questions.
 
2012-08-18 10:07:18 PM

RoyBatty: GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.
Lionel Mandrake: Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

I simply don't care. Fight your own wars.

You guys should ask someone to read the article aloud for you. And slowly.

And don't be afraid to ask questions.


Fortunately, I don't care what you say, either.
 
2012-08-18 10:27:47 PM

RoyBatty: And don't be afraid to ask questions.


How long would Israel exist without U.S. foreign aid?
 
2012-08-18 10:34:48 PM

2wolves: RoyBatty: And don't be afraid to ask questions.

How long would Israel exist without U.S. foreign aid?


Beats me. Their GDP is $242.93 B, I believe our aid to them is $3B so presumably forever (??), but I am not sure of your point or its relevance to this article....
 
2012-08-18 10:35:04 PM
"Let's you and him fight."
 
2012-08-18 10:35:57 PM
Who cares? Let them sort themselves out.
 
2012-08-18 10:38:14 PM
So Israel wants to bomb Iran because of the words of a man with no real power. Says a lot about them.
 
2012-08-18 10:40:21 PM
How about Israel fighting its our own damn war for a change? Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you and $2 billion a year we've still give you and go knock yourselves out?

Leave America out of this. We are too fighting Sunni/Shia proxy wars for the Arabs to help you.
 
2012-08-18 10:41:06 PM
Israeli government: a bunch of whiny biatches afraid of something harmless and willing to sacrifice their principles in order to destroy it. No wonder they get along with Republicans so well.
 
2012-08-18 10:41:29 PM
Am I the only one tired of Israel's BS and wishes that there was a competent opposition to Bibi and his group of Likud retards?
 
2012-08-18 10:42:08 PM

Lunchlady: Who cares? Let them sort themselves out.


Well, the problem is that one of the two people who is in the running to be our next President has promised again and again that he'll give Israel carte blanc.

/won't tell you which one
//I'll surprise you
 
2012-08-18 10:42:24 PM
They didn't say they're not afraid of the Americans. But you can see from their behavior that they're not afraid."

My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw a bunch of Iranian Mullah's at 31 Flavors last night totally dissing America. I guess they don't take America seriously.
 
2012-08-18 10:42:46 PM
Gotta distract people from the real issues you know 

/Only reason why I think Bibi is still participating in this geopolitical pissing match
 
2012-08-18 10:43:19 PM

nmemkha: How about Israel fighting its our own damn war for a change? Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you and $2 billion a year we've still give you and go knock yourselves out?


Um, I think that's the point of this article. You realize "Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you" that's exactly what Netanyahu wants to do.

Though farker Lionel Mandrake, naming himself after a character famous for trying to avoid a nuclear world war doesn't listen to me, simply sticking your fingers in your ears and saying la la la go do it yourself to Israel is precisely the action that many people think will bring the US to a nuclear world war.
 
2012-08-18 10:44:01 PM

RoyBatty: GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.
Lionel Mandrake: Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

I simply don't care. Fight your own wars.

You guys should ask someone to read the article aloud for you. And slowly.

And don't be afraid to ask questions.


Why would i want a Zionist puppet like Mittens in the White house instead of an American Patriot like Barack Obama?
 
2012-08-18 10:44:30 PM
You want to really piss off Ahmadinejad? Take all the money we'd normally spend killing his citizens and instead airlift in a bunch of schools and hospitals and water treatment plants and highways and a couple of high speed interwebs. That'd piss him off real good.
 
2012-08-18 10:45:46 PM

Mrtraveler01: /Only reason why I think Bibi is still participating in this geopolitical pissing match


I don't even think he wants to distract people from it, he just flat out doesn't care about what else is going on.
 
2012-08-18 10:46:08 PM
Israel must be afraid of them too. I don't see them fighting them right now either. they still want big brother to go fights they pick.
 
2012-08-18 10:46:21 PM
There's something strange in the world when there are two states having a political conflict in the middle east and the one we're supporting is the oppressive theocracy that's officially an apartheid state instead of the oppressive theocracy that's actively trying to improve the quality of life for its poorer citizens.

//Then, I guess there's not really a right choice there.
 
2012-08-18 10:46:26 PM

Notabunny: That'd piss him off real good.


Iran already has that stuff.
 
2012-08-18 10:47:33 PM

GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.


either that or f*cking pay us to fight for 'em. And I mean cash on the barrel head up front and non-negotiable.
 
2012-08-18 10:49:50 PM

Notabunny: You want to really piss off Ahmadinejad? Take all the money we'd normally spend killing his citizens and instead airlift in a bunch of schools and hospitals and water treatment plants and highways and a couple of high speed interwebs. That'd piss him off real good.


If you guys had done that type of thing with Cuba 40 years ago your flag would already have 51 stars on it.
 
2012-08-18 10:50:05 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

I simply don't care. Fight your own wars.


Was that our goal? For Iran to fear us? That seems like a stupid thing to shoot for.
 
2012-08-18 10:50:08 PM

Notabunny: You want to really piss off Ahmadinejad? Take all the money we'd normally spend killing his citizens and instead airlift in a bunch of schools and hospitals and water treatment plants and highways and a couple of high speed interwebs. That'd piss him off real good.


No, that would be SOCIALISM! We have to keep killing people until they see it our way!
 
2012-08-18 10:51:01 PM
Nothing so self-perpetuating as a siege mentality....
 
2012-08-18 10:52:10 PM

Jim_Callahan: There's something strange in the world when there are two states having a political conflict in the middle east and the one we're supporting is the oppressive theocracy that's officially an apartheid state instead of the oppressive theocracy that's actively trying to improve the quality of life for its poorer citizens.

//Then, I guess there's not really a right choice there.


The choice is based on who best protects our oil. Israel has been a useful traffic cop for the US since 1967, so that's our theocracy.

/That said, our invasion of Iraq could be interpreted as a massive show of support for Iran. I believe there was something about arms in the 80s as well.
 
2012-08-18 10:52:18 PM
 
2012-08-18 10:52:45 PM

sno man: Notabunny: You want to really piss off Ahmadinejad? Take all the money we'd normally spend killing his citizens and instead airlift in a bunch of schools and hospitals and water treatment plants and highways and a couple of high speed interwebs. That'd piss him off real good.

If you guys had done that type of thing with Cuba 40 years ago your flag would already have 51 stars on it.


Another instance where we let a tiny, loudmouthed pressure group determine our foreign policy.
 
2012-08-18 10:52:50 PM

WhyteRaven74: So Israel wants to bomb Iran because of the words of a man with no real power. Says a lot about them.


he's the mouthpiece for the man with the power.

when he says "wipe israel off the map", it's significant.
 
2012-08-18 10:54:09 PM
They have no reason to truly be afraid. The US does not have the capability to occupy a country as large and powerful as Iran. Hell, we can't even accomplish that in Afghanistan. Iran has all the terrain issues Afghanistan does, plus a well organized military in place, and covers about 4 times as much area. The worst thing the US could do to Iran is drop a couple bombs, which would do nothing except piss off the international community and further isolate the US from it's traditional allies.
 
2012-08-18 10:54:46 PM

AliceBToklasLives: The choice is based on who best protects our oil. Israel has been a useful traffic cop for the US since 1967


This is shiat and has been shiat for some time.

In fact, its been a few decades where the two interests have been at direct odds.
 
2012-08-18 10:54:50 PM

Kumana Wanalaia: WhyteRaven74: So Israel wants to bomb Iran because of the words of a man with no real power. Says a lot about them.

he's the mouthpiece for the man with the power.

when he says "wipe israel off the map", it's significant.


he said wipe the current regime from the map. Like Bibi wipes Iranian nuclear scientists off the map.
 
2012-08-18 10:56:15 PM

Lost Thought 00: They have no reason to truly be afraid. The US does not have the capability to occupy a country as large and powerful as Iran. Hell, we can't even accomplish that in Afghanistan. Iran has all the terrain issues Afghanistan does, plus a well organized military in place, and covers about 4 times as much area. The worst thing the US could do to Iran is drop a couple bombs, which would do nothing except piss off the international community and further isolate the US from it's traditional allies.


and possibly cause our people in Iraq to suffer from retaliation ,make gas prices soar and cost a lot of money.
 
2012-08-18 10:57:16 PM

RoyBatty: nmemkha: How about Israel fighting its our own damn war for a change? Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you and $2 billion a year we've still give you and go knock yourselves out?

Um, I think that's the point of this article. You realize "Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you" that's exactly what Netanyahu wants to do.

Though farker Lionel Mandrake, naming himself after a character famous for trying to avoid a nuclear world war doesn't listen to me, simply sticking your fingers in your ears and saying la la la go do it yourself to Israel is precisely the action that many people think will bring the US to a nuclear world war.


Hey Israel doesn't need our permission. But, as the aggressor, they are on their own should they write a check their ass can't cash.
 
2012-08-18 10:58:51 PM

Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: The choice is based on who best protects our oil. Israel has been a useful traffic cop for the US since 1967

This is shiat and has been shiat for some time.

In fact, its been a few decades where the two interests have been at direct odds.


Our common interests with Israel ended with the Cold War. Israel is a stinking, fetid, rotting albatross around our necks.
 
2012-08-18 11:00:48 PM

Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: The choice is based on who best protects our oil. Israel has been a useful traffic cop for the US since 1967

This is shiat and has been shiat for some time.

In fact, its been a few decades where the two interests have been at direct odds.


Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?
 
2012-08-18 11:01:06 PM

jso2897: Our common interests with Israel ended with the Cold War


This argument is much easier to make than stating a lack of common interests.

Middle Eastern dynamics changed drastically in the early 1990's.
 
2012-08-18 11:02:36 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?


You are not about to use foreign aid to Israel as a metric to defend your argument, are you? You might want to rethink this.
 
2012-08-18 11:04:51 PM

Jim_Callahan: There's something strange in the world when there are two states having a political conflict in the middle east and the one we're supporting is the oppressive theocracy that's officially an apartheid state instead of the oppressive theocracy that's actively trying to improve the quality of life for its poorer citizens.

//Then, I guess there's not really a right choice there.


Two reasons we're supporting the apartheid state instead of the one that at least pretends to care about its second-class citizens:

1) We need to be buddy-buddy with Israel so that when (not "if") that temple in Jerusalem gets destroyed, Jesus™ will return and all the good Christians in America will get raptored into Heaven™. This offer for a free ticket into Heaven™ is valid for all people who practice American Evangelical Fundamentalist Christianity.
2) anybody who does not fully, unconditionally, unquestioningly and unwaveringly support Israel in every last thing they do is an anti-semite who wears full SS regalia and chisel swastikas into the sides of synagogues every chance they get; likewise, anybody who lays even an iota of blame on Israel w/r/t their conflict with the Palestinians is a Nazi-cosplaying, swastika-carving Jew hater. There is absolutely no grey area between the two extremes of "loving Israel more than America or your own family" and "hating Jews with the fury of a thousand suns" whatsoever.

You can thank those New American Century cockgoblins and AIPAC for all this.
 
2012-08-18 11:04:58 PM

WhyteRaven74: Notabunny: That'd piss him off real good.

Iran already has that stuff.


I know Iran is hardly a backwater. But it just didn't seem helpful to suggest we airlift in WalMarts, Taco Bells, and Hot Topics.
 
2012-08-18 11:05:11 PM

nmemkha: RoyBatty: nmemkha: How about Israel fighting its our own damn war for a change? Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you and $2 billion a year we've still give you and go knock yourselves out?

Um, I think that's the point of this article. You realize "Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you" that's exactly what Netanyahu wants to do.

Though farker Lionel Mandrake, naming himself after a character famous for trying to avoid a nuclear world war doesn't listen to me, simply sticking your fingers in your ears and saying la la la go do it yourself to Israel is precisely the action that many people think will bring the US to a nuclear world war.

Hey Israel doesn't need our permission. But, as the aggressor, they are on their own should they write a check their ass can't cash.


That's only true as long as we have a sane, American patriot in the White House. Zionist Mormon Fundy Romney has already publicly stated that he will do whatever Israel tells him to do, rather than functioning primarily as the POTUS. An open commitment to commit treason.
 
2012-08-18 11:05:13 PM
no drama obama iz all like "stuxnet" biatch! And Akhmood iz all like "Oh I know you didnit jus' do that!"
 
2012-08-18 11:05:31 PM

Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?

You are not about to use foreign aid to Israel as a metric to defend your argument, are you? You might want to rethink this.


Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?
 
2012-08-18 11:07:24 PM
You know, Israelis are nice people and all but that being said fark THEM. They're big boys and girls. Let them take care of their own shiat for a change.
 
2012-08-18 11:08:10 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?

You are not about to use foreign aid to Israel as a metric to defend your argument, are you? You might want to rethink this.

Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?


When youi look at how much money we give away, and the countries we give it to, that scenario seems quite plausible, actually. Or, perhaps, an Ouija board is involved.
 
2012-08-18 11:08:27 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?


Once upon a time, a rouge computer program took control of a political action committee...
 
2012-08-18 11:08:35 PM

PlasticMoby: You know, Israelis are nice people and all but that being said fark THEM. They're big boys and girls. Let them take care of their own shiat for a change.


No, no. Stick with the first part. And then try to figure out how to help the nice people, who, by the way, think we're nice people, too.
 
2012-08-18 11:08:43 PM

Hobodeluxe: Israel must be afraid of them too. I don't see them fighting them right now either. they still want big brother to go fights they pick.


Exactly. Helping Israel defend itself is one thing, but right now, they are behaving like an obnoxious frat boy with a Napoleon complex, who talks shiat to everyone at the bar because he thinks his boys are going to step in.
 
2012-08-18 11:09:07 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?

You are not about to use foreign aid to Israel as a metric to defend your argument, are you? You might want to rethink this.

Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?


Holocaust guilt
 
2012-08-18 11:09:18 PM
What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?
 
2012-08-18 11:10:31 PM

stoli n coke: Hobodeluxe: Israel must be afraid of them too. I don't see them fighting them right now either. they still want big brother to go fights they pick.

Exactly. Helping Israel defend itself is one thing, but right now, they are behaving like an obnoxious frat boy with a Napoleon complex, who talks shiat to everyone at the bar because he thinks his boys are going to step in.


That's the most accurate depiction I've ever heard describing Israel's foreign/domestic policy.
 
2012-08-18 11:12:58 PM

WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?


well the fundies think that we're obligated to do the bidding of "God's chosen people"
and the corporate media seems to think it's the rational thing to do.
and the military industrial complex loves the idea

but unless you're one of them all you get is the bill.
 
2012-08-18 11:14:55 PM

WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?


One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.
 
2012-08-18 11:15:09 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?


The reasons why we used to give money and the reasons why we give money now have changed.
This predates the shift of economic/military and now military aid and easily goes back to Truman. People will make the argument that from about 1967 to 1988-89 that your argument will hold up. Some will criticize it, but it has merit during these years. Though, the cold war justification fell apart after the cold war.

Now you have a country that unifies a naturally divided region against the US.

Just like i posted in the other thread this has roots in a strategic shift by israel after Sadam was weakened in the first gulf war. The Israeli 180 on Iran occurred right after Iraq had its nuts cut off in Desert Storm. Theres both domestic and regional elements there. Also, theres the relationship between Israel and the US that was in peril after the end of the Cold War.
So they're looking for a new explanation in the form of a new common enemy. And so they've invented one, which we're going to hear a great deal more about in the future, and that is Islamic fundamentalism, which they say is the great wave that's threatening the West.
-George Ball 1993

We needed some new glue for the alliance [with America]. And the new glue . . . was radical Islam.And Iran was radical Islam.
-Efraim Inbar, Begin-Sadat Center

2011-12-05 12:24:30 AM
The defeat ofIraq and the disappearance ofthe dreaded "eastern front"caused Israel's eyes to turn to Iran. 166

Israelis need existential threat - worst case scenario 167

In spite ofIraq's defeat,many in the Israeli military continued to worry about Saddam's chemical and nuclear weapons program."Iran wasn't an im- mediate threat.Iran was never an immediate threat.Iraq was,however,"Gen. Amnon Lipkin-Shahak explained.Israeli academics and security experts were equally critical.Israel Shahak pointed out that the Labor government depicted Iran as a threat at the height ofIran's weakness. 168

Shai Feldman ofthe Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies wrote that Israel's need for a new "boogey man"lay behind the exaggeration ofIran's military power. Anoushiravan Ehteshami and Raymond Hinnebusch argued that Peres and Rabin turned Iran into a modern day Golem-a mythical figure of fear and loathing in Israeli folklore. 168

Perhaps most importantly,the alarmism over Iran reinforced the message that Washington needed Israel.The strategic significance Israel had enjoyed during the Cold War could be regained through the common threat ofIran and Islamic fun- damentalism-instead ofbeing a friendly bulwark against Soviet expan- sionism,Israel would now be a friendly bulwark against Iran's regional am- bitions in a unipolar world."There was a feeling in Israel that because of the end ofthe Cold War,relations with the U.S.were cooling and we needed some new glue for the alliance,"Inbar said."And the new glue... was radical Islam. And Iran was radical Islam." 170

pro-Israeli think tank that Indyk helped found in 1985.It was a major policy declaration,originally slated to be given by National Security Advisor Anthony Lake himself. The policy was a major shift in America's approach to the region.Traditionally,Washington sought to balance Iran and Iraq against each other to maintain a degree ofstability. Now,Indyk argued,America's strength had reached such levels that it did not need to balance the two against each other-it could balance both with- out relying on either. 171

While winning praise in Tel Aviv,the new policy met with heavy criticism in Washington.Foreign policy experts inside the Beltway found the Israeli focus ofthe new policy disturbing.The Israeli origin of Dual Containment "was pretty much accepted in Washington,"according to Assistant Secretary ofState Pelletreau,even though in public administration officials conceded only that the policy was "influenced or stimulated"by Israeli thinking. 171

The harshest critics maintained that the Israeli tilt ofthe policy produced undesirable consequences for American interests."It was a nutty idea,"Scowcroft complained.It was simply "crazy"to try to balance both Iran and Iraq with American power,he said. 171

Iran and Israel were two ofthe few countries in the region that were powerful enough to shape the new Middle East order.This alone put the two non-Arab powerhouses on a collision course.Israel rec- ognized this reality first,but the Iranians were quick to pick up on it. 174

In the new Israel-centric order that would be created,Israel would lead while Tehran would be prevented from "playing a role equal to its capacity and power." 176

For the first time,Iran began to translate its anti-Israel rhetoric into opera- tional policy. Contrary to the dictum ofAyatollah Khomeini,Iran would now become a front-line state against Israel,because ifOslo failed,so would the efforts to create a new regional order on the back ofIran's isolation. 176
 
2012-08-18 11:17:57 PM

shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.


I love it when people frame diplomacy in terms of the casual murder of millions of innocent people
 
2012-08-18 11:22:25 PM

Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?

The reasons why we used to give money and the reasons why we give money now have changed.
This predates the shift of economic/military and now military aid and easily goes back to Truman. People will make the argument that from about 1967 to 1988-89 that your argument will hold up. Some will criticize it, but it has merit during these years. Though, the cold war justification fell apart after the cold war.

[etc. etc.]


In other words, the US sent foreign aid to Israel from 1967 to 1989 because they believed Israel supported their interests in the Middle East, and the US sent foreign aid to Israel from 1990 to present because they believed Israel supported their interests in the Middle East.
 
2012-08-18 11:22:48 PM
Though, not everyone agreed with this. Forrestal, the first US Secretary of Defense is famous (or infamous) in this regard. Heres a couple of excerpts from his diary.

2012-03-03 09:48:01 AM

From 14 July 1946
America has lost very greatly in prestige in the Arab world by our attitude on Palestine. The British say that they cannot do all they would like to for the Arabs because of the pressure that we were able to exert in connection with the British loan.

26 July 1946
After the Cabinet meeting today talked with Byrnes, Patterson and Snyder [now Secretary of the Treasury] about the Palestine-Arabian-Jewish question. Jews are injecting vigorous and active propaganda to force the president's hand with reference to the immediate immigration of Jews into Palestine. Two areas have been agreed upon-one for the Arabs and one for the Jews, with the Arabs getting the less desirable land. The problem is complicated by the fact that the President went out on the limb in endorsing the Barkley-Krumm [sic] report, saying that a hundred thousand Jews should be permitted entry into Palestine.

August 1947
[Marshall] read a monograph on Palestine in which the conclusion was drawn that the british are not keeping troops in Palestine on account of their oil interests in particular. Aside from the normal British doggedness in sticking out a difficult and unpleasant situation, he thought there was no particularly strong British desire to retain the mandate over Palestine.
4 Sept 1947
At the end of the lunch Hannegan [Postmaster General] brought up the question of the president's making a statement of policy on Palestine, particularly with reference to the entrance of a hundred and fifty thousand Jews into Palestine. he said he didn't want to press for a decision one way or the other but simply wanted to point out that such a statement would have a very great influence and great effect on the raising of funds for the Democratic National Committee. He said very large sums were obtained a year ago from jewish contributors and that they would be influenced in either giving or withholding by what the President did on Palestine. . . . I pointed out that the president's remarks on Palestine of a year ago did not have the expected efect in the New York election. [It was added] that the President was prompted to make the statement by Rabbi [Abba Hillel] Silver of Cincinnati [actually of Cleveland], who was neither a Democrat nor friendly to Truman, and said that the net effect of the President's observation was to make the British exceedingly angry, particularly when it was coupled with the rejection by the Grady committee Report. It amounted to a denunciation of the work of his own appointee. it also resulted in Secretary of State Byrnes washing his hands of the whole Palestine matter, which meant that it was allowed to drift without action and practically without and American policy.

1 Dec 1947
Lovett reported on the result of the United Nations action on Palestine over the week end. He said he had never in his life been subject to as much pressure as he had been in the three days beginning Thursday morning and ending Saturday night. [Herbert Bayard] Swope, Robert Nathan, were among those who had importuned him. . . . The Firesstone Tire and Rubber Company, which has a concession in Liberia, reported that it had been telephoned to and asked to transmit a message to their representative in Liberia directing him to bring pressure on the Liberian government to vote in favor of partition. The zeal and activity of the jews had almost resulted in defeating the objectives they were after.
I remarked that many thoughful people of the Jewish faith had deep misgivings about the wisdom of the Zionists' presssures for a Jewish state in Palestine, and I also remarked that the New York Times editorial of Sunday morning pointed up those misgivings when it said, "Many of us have long had doubts. . . . concerning the wisdom in erecting a political state on the basis of religious faith." I said I thought that the situation was fraught with great danger for the future security of this country.
The President referred to the limitations put under our participation in the implementation of the Palestine partition (that he had repeatedly made the statement that American armed forces could not be used toward this end): however, i fail to see how we can avoid meeting that issue if participation by our forces is asked by the United Nations; (in other words, if we are asked to contribute our prorated share of an international force to carry out the United Nations decision). . . .

3 December 1947
Lunch today with Jimmy Byrnes. We talked about Palestine. Byrnes recalled the fact that he had disassociated himself from his decision of a year ago to turn down the Grady report which recommended a federated state for palestine or a single Arabian state. he said the decision on the part of the President to reject this recommendation and to criticize the british for their conduct of Palestinian affairs had placed Bevin and Attlee in a most difficult position. He said that Niles [David K. Niles, administrative assistant to the President,] and Sam Rosenman were chiefly responsible for the presidents decision; that both had told the president that Dewey was about to come out with a statement favoring the Zionist position on Palestine, and that they had insisted that unless the president anticipated this movement New York State would be lost to the Democrats.
I asked Byrnes what he thought of the possibility of getting Republican leaders to agree with the Democrats to have the Palestine question placed on a nonpolitical basis. He wasn't particularly optimistic about the sucess of this effort because fo the fact that Rabbi Silver was one of Taft's close associates and because Taft followed Silver on the Palestine-Haifa question. I said I thought it was a most disastrous and regrettable fact that the foreign policy of this country was determined by the contributions of a particular bloc of special might make to the party funds. 
 
2012-08-18 11:23:47 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?

You are not about to use foreign aid to Israel as a metric to defend your argument, are you? You might want to rethink this.

Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?


Because Jesus.
 
2012-08-18 11:24:55 PM

sno man: jaylectricity: themindiswatching: Vote for a REAL man.

If only there was one running.

There is only one running.


Is it considered running when you are able to out strut your opponent to the finish line?
 
2012-08-18 11:26:38 PM

RoyBatty: nmemkha: How about Israel fighting its our own damn war for a change? Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you and $2 billion a year we've still give you and go knock yourselves out?

Um, I think that's the point of this article. You realize "Why don't you take all those high-tech weapons we have given you" that's exactly what Netanyahu wants to do.

Though farker Lionel Mandrake, naming himself after a character famous for trying to avoid a nuclear world war doesn't listen to me, simply sticking your fingers in your ears and saying la la la go do it yourself to Israel is precisely the action that many people think will bring the US to a nuclear world war.


Well then, we must clearly attack every nation that pursues nuclear research. This is the only plan that will keep us safe and prosperous and not result in a nuclear war. And it will always work forever.
 
2012-08-18 11:30:15 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: In other words, the US sent foreign aid to Israel from 1967 to 1989 because they believed Israel supported their interests in the Middle East, and the US sent foreign aid to Israel from 1990 to present because they believed Israel supported their interests in the Middle East.


After the early aid to Israel becomes increasingly politicized and tied to domestic lobbying efforts. Bush 41 makes up a famous example.
2006-12-07 05:11:04 PM
keep on reading down to
2006-12-07 05:49:23 PM


Its also easy to demonstrate the change in strategic liability. The first point of reference is to weigh the liabilities to the zero (0) times Israel attacked anyone on our behalf.
 
2012-08-18 11:31:51 PM

Fuggin Bizzy: Because Jesus.


The religious right in this country are a suprisingly inept, diffuse, and splintered, group.
 
2012-08-18 11:32:19 PM

SN1987a goes boom: sno man: jaylectricity: themindiswatching: Vote for a REAL man.

If only there was one running.

There is only one running.

Is it considered running when you are able to out strut your opponent to the finish line?


The trick will be getting everyone out to vote... If it's a lock, many won't bother and all of a sudden, it's not a lock anymore...
 
2012-08-18 11:35:06 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Well then,


Lionel, the point is not that you and I disagree, the point is that you and Benjamin Netanyahu agree entirely and perhaps because you refuse to read the article or cannot understand it.

Lionel Mandrake: Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

I simply don't care. Fight your own wars.

 
2012-08-18 11:37:12 PM

shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.


Yea a nuke.

Republicans always the intelligence long term thinkers.
 
2012-08-18 11:38:19 PM

RoyBatty: the point is that you and Benjamin Netanyahu agree entirely and perhaps because you refuse to read the article or cannot understand it.


Netanyahu isn't even mentioned in the article. What's your point, again?
 
2012-08-18 11:46:35 PM

Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: In other words, the US sent foreign aid to Israel from 1967 to 1989 because they believed Israel supported their interests in the Middle East, and the US sent foreign aid to Israel from 1990 to present because they believed Israel supported their interests in the Middle East.

After the early aid to Israel becomes increasingly politicized and tied to domestic lobbying efforts. Bush 41 makes up a famous example.
2006-12-07 05:11:04 PM
keep on reading down to
2006-12-07 05:49:23 PM


Its also easy to demonstrate the change in strategic liability. The first point of reference is to weigh the liabilities to the zero (0) times Israel attacked anyone on our behalf.


So it's AIPAC? Certainly part of the reason, but strategic reasons are also given (by, among others, AIPAC).

/BTW - I agree Israel is a strategic liability - at least in the real world and not in policy-making circles
 
2012-08-18 11:46:40 PM

NateGrey: shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.

Yea a nuke.

Republicans always the intelligence long term thinkers.


Al Franken once said that one thing Republicans hate is being told that their actions have long-term consequences.
 
2012-08-18 11:49:03 PM
This is a lot like the scheme we used to play in high school, where you'd casually mention to the huge, yet developmentally stunted jock, that someone across the cafeteria was talking shiat about him. I had a larger point to make here, but after writing that first sentence, yeah, America is a developmentally stunted jock, and we're going to pick a fight with some random dude because our short friend with glasses told us he was talking shiat...

/Politics: it's like your high school cafeteria, but with nuclear weapons
 
2012-08-18 11:50:30 PM

Lionel Mandrake: RoyBatty: the point is that you and Benjamin Netanyahu agree entirely and perhaps because you refuse to read the article or cannot understand it.

Netanyahu isn't even mentioned in the article. What's your point, again?


Sigh.

The article is about a guy that has been trying to avert the immediate Israeli strike that you and Netanyahu seem to favor.

You don't understand the article and so your response is:

"I simply don't care. Fight your own wars."

To which your pal Bibi, says, "Thank you Lionel Mandrake, we will."
 
2012-08-18 11:56:44 PM

shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.


That would have an astronomical moral cost.

Murder is wrong.

I feel a little sick every time some group of people argues over whether or not mass murder is merely too expensive.
 
2012-08-18 11:57:35 PM

RoyBatty: Lionel Mandrake: RoyBatty: the point is that you and Benjamin Netanyahu agree entirely and perhaps because you refuse to read the article or cannot understand it.

Netanyahu isn't even mentioned in the article. What's your point, again?

Sigh.

The article is about a guy that has been trying to avert the immediate Israeli strike that you and Netanyahu seem to favor.

You don't understand the article and so your response is:

"I simply don't care. Fight your own wars."

To which your pal Bibi, says, "Thank you Lionel Mandrake, we will."


You clearly know what I believe better than I do.

Thank you for explaining it to me.
 
2012-08-18 11:58:55 PM

AliceBToklasLives: So it's AIPAC?


AIPAC is just one organization. Theres others.

AliceBToklasLives: /BTW - I agree Israel is a strategic liability - at least in the real world and not in policy-making circles


AAhhhhhhhhhhhh. Ok. Thanks for the clarification.

Let me add then.

Recall, then the famous fight between Powell/State and the neocons that those policy making circles were having this discussion. Sometimes it wasnt just the neocons.

Recall the neocons were lobbying for Clinton to push the ILA (Iraq Liberation Act) during the blowjob trial. It was a political loser for him to veto this congressional act. In October 1998, under intense lobbying pressure from the neocons, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed, the "Iraqi Liberation Act." Brownback summed up Clintons actions on it: "I cannot understand why President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act when he had absolutely no intention of implementing the provisions of that law.....and yet not one official of this Administration has been willing to take even the most minimal step toward that end....nothing - NOTHING - has been spent.

Also recall "when Israel formally requested the loan guarantee last September, Israeli officials attempted to go over President [Bush]'s head to win passage in Congress. Mr. Bush responded by calling himself "one lonely little guy" standing up to "a thousand lobbyists working the other side of the question. [1]"
 
2012-08-19 12:04:32 AM
Fark you, Israel. Take care of your own problems.
 
2012-08-19 12:06:35 AM

Zeno-25: Fark you, Israel Middle East. Take care of your own problems.


FTFM.
 
2012-08-19 12:06:38 AM

Zeno-25: Fark you, Israel. Take care of your own problems.


In case nobody heard that:

Fark you, Israel. Take care of your own problems.

Seriously: fark you.
 
2012-08-19 12:06:59 AM

Zeno-25: Fark you, Israel. Take care of your own problems.


Watch it. Party Boy is going to come in and lecture you
 
2012-08-19 12:07:52 AM

Lionel Mandrake: Watch it. Party Boy is going to come in and lecture you


great. now i feel like a school marm.

Ill take a fark break.
 
2012-08-19 12:09:29 AM
FTA:

There is no American president who wants the NPT [the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] to collapse on his watch and for Iran to be the Middle East hegemon because it is nuclear...

Over launching another preemptive war in the Middle East? Yeah, good luck with that. Fool me once...
 
2012-08-19 12:12:45 AM

sno man: The trick will be getting everyone out to vote... If it's a lock, many won't bother and all of a sudden, it's not a lock anymore...


Bingo. It's kind of crazy how we give so much power to the people willing to go out and vote. But then again, it almost doesn't even matter because most of your life is determined by the people you deal with every day.
 
2012-08-19 12:21:26 AM
Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

What childlike manipulative bullshiat.
 
2012-08-19 12:23:29 AM

Rich Cream: Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

What childlike manipulative bullshiat.



I heard they said your mom sucks dick in the alley.
 
2012-08-19 12:25:51 AM

ArcadianRefugee: Zeno-25: Fark you, Israel. Take care of your own problems.

In case nobody heard that:

Fark you, Israel. Take care of your own problems.

Seriously: fark you.


Sigh, just stop not contributing to this discussion.
 
2012-08-19 12:28:35 AM
Why the fark should anybody care? Israel doesn't want to get along with its neighbors, it never has. Hell, back before there was an Israel, there were Zionists in Palestine committing terrorist acts on the Palestinian people, no matter if those Palestinians were Muslim, Christian or Jew. Know how Israel remembers them? With a farking medal. fark Lehi, its Likkud descendants, and every American who backs them.
 
2012-08-19 12:28:46 AM
It's odd because I keep hearing from the Zionists that Iran is a threat but I only ever read about Israels promise to attack Iran......
 
2012-08-19 12:28:53 AM

consider this: Obviously you don't understand the meaning of the word "pals".


I'm not your pals, buddies.
 
2012-08-19 12:30:01 AM

RoyBatty: 2wolves: RoyBatty: And don't be afraid to ask questions.

How long would Israel exist without U.S. foreign aid?

Beats me. Their GDP is $242.93 B, I believe our aid to them is $3B so presumably forever (??), but I am not sure of your point or its relevance to this article....


You said to not be afraid to ask questions.
 
2012-08-19 12:31:54 AM

LectertheChef: Why the fark should anybody care? Israel doesn't want to get along with its neighbors, it never has. Hell, back before there was an Israel, there were Zionists in Palestine committing terrorist acts on the Palestinian people


And look at how much has changed today
 
2012-08-19 12:36:41 AM

shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.


Imagine all Persian people live up to the negative stereotypes. The men are all douchebags, and the women are all snobby materialists who are easily impressed by overly done hair and gaudy amounts of gold (and by douchebags.) Imagine that. And imagine that all the Iranians who are not douchey are religious fundamentalists. Do they deserve to have their cities bombed, even with conventional weapons? Do you like thinking about all those unpleasant people standing in the streets crying outside the remains of their houses while body parts of their douchey neighbors lie nearby? And if that sounds good to you, why don't we start in New Jersey? Or Dallas (see my username)?

Okay, now imagine that many Iranians are okay people, nice people. Don't you think we should tell Israel to cool their heels and not be the ones to ignite a war? There's plenty for them to do in the unconventional war, assassinating scientists while the Iranian government supports Hamas and tries to pretend it works for them. Let the nasties fight the nasties. Just three years ago we were cheering on the Green Revolution; now do we want to bomb those same people? Of course not. Leave the people of Tehran and Isfahan in peace while their governments settle their differences some other way.
 
2012-08-19 12:42:30 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-19 12:42:55 AM

2wolves: You said to not be afraid to ask questions.


Well that was for GAT_00 and Lionel_Mandrake.

But you, no, be afraid, be very afraid.
 
2012-08-19 12:43:37 AM

consider this: LectertheChef: Israel doesn't want to get along with its neighbors, it never has.

Because Israel's neighbors have a long history of being so friendly in return, right?


I don't think anyones hands are totally clean in the Middle East. Thats seems to be the biggest problem...everyone wants to play the victim and no one wants to take responsibility for anything. It's like a bunch of children bickering. You started it! No you started it! It's all your fault! No it's all your fault! I hate you! I hate you! Everyone just needs to stop and actually figure something out...probably never happen though
 
2012-08-19 12:44:54 AM
Israel is a political mistake made in 1948. We could've saved the world a lot of trouble by just giving them Florida. The older ones already own a significant portion of it, anyway. We could have 49 five-pointed stars and one Star of David on our flag.
 
2012-08-19 12:46:25 AM

NateGrey: shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.

Yea a nuke.

Republicans always the intelligence long term thinkers.


If we don't nuke innocent people, how will we show the world it's not okay to develop nukes that could be used to kill innocent people?
 
2012-08-19 12:47:31 AM

ecmoRandomNumbers: Israel is a political mistake made in 1948. We could've saved the world a lot of trouble by just giving them Florida. The older ones already own a significant portion of it, anyway. We could have 49 five-pointed stars and one Star of David on our flag.


we'd still have the same shiat today but instead of the palestinians it would be Cubans and Hatians...

/oh wait
 
2012-08-19 12:47:43 AM
Given the current administration? I wouldn't be afraid of the US either if I were a two bit dictator. Particularly when the current POTUS showed no spine what so ever in helping out the people of Iran when they had an uprising.

Jimmy Carter did more to help the current Iranian government get in power than Obama did to help remove it.
 
2012-08-19 12:49:04 AM

randomjsa: Given the current administration? I wouldn't be afraid of the US either if I were a two bit dictator. Particularly when the current POTUS showed no spine what so ever in helping out the people of Iran when they had an uprising.

Jimmy Carter did more to help the current Iranian government get in power than Obama did to help remove it.


so your saying both they're equally the worst president
 
2012-08-19 12:50:18 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-08-19 12:51:03 AM

randomjsa: Particularly when the current POTUS showed no spine what so ever in helping out the people of Iran when they had an uprising.


For once we completely agree. The Green Revolution leaders have made it quite clear that any aid given by the US would strongly undermine their cause, but that if the US wanted to help, lifting sanctions would be a tremendous help to the Iranian revolutionary cause. I'm glad we can both agree that the responsible path for the president to follow is lifting Iranian sanctions.
 
2012-08-19 12:52:27 AM

consider this: LectertheChef: Israel doesn't want to get along with its neighbors, it never has.

Because Israel's neighbors have a long history of being so friendly in return, right?


Never said they were, but it's important to remember that Israel has always been just as bad, if not worse, than the people they keep telling us to hate. Should also keep in mind that Israel backed Hamas when Hamas was in a power struggle with the PLO. Israel makes its own messes, they need to learn how to clean up after themselves.
 
2012-08-19 12:54:02 AM

randomjsa: Given the current administration? I wouldn't be afraid of the US either if I were a two bit dictator. Particularly when the current POTUS showed no spine what so ever in helping out the people of Iran when they had an uprising.

Jimmy Carter did more to help the current Iranian government get in power than Obama did to help remove it.


Why should he have helped out the Green Revolution? They were a bunch of rich, urban college kids, with no support from the working class, or people in rural areas. It was doomed from the start.
 
2012-08-19 12:56:54 AM

consider this: LectertheChef: Never said they were, but it's important to remember that Israel has always been just as bad, if not worse, than the people they keep telling us to hate.

I disagree. Even if Israel sits back and does nothing, eventually they get some rockets launched their way or a suicide bomber or two blowing themselves up. Israel responds to aggression, they don't initiate it.


Just like they accidentally shot up the Liberty, right?
 
2012-08-19 12:57:00 AM

Mildot: randomjsa: Given the current administration? I wouldn't be afraid of the US either if I were a two bit dictator. Particularly when the current POTUS showed no spine what so ever in helping out the people of Iran when they had an uprising.

Jimmy Carter did more to help the current Iranian government get in power than Obama did to help remove it.

so your saying both they're equally the worst president


What about the people of Libya and Syria?
 
2012-08-19 01:04:43 AM

GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.


Can....not....resist....comment........arrrrrggghh

You know who else was a warmonger?
 
2012-08-19 01:11:27 AM

ssa5: GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.

Can....not....resist....comment........arrrrrggghh

You know who else was a warmonger?


Milk, nose, keyboard, etc
 
2012-08-19 01:13:23 AM
$100 says we are going to war with Iran, I mean we don't set up a whole middle east invading infrastructure for nothing.
 
2012-08-19 01:18:59 AM

consider this: LectertheChef: Israel doesn't want to get along with its neighbors, it never has.

Because Israel's neighbors have a long history of being so friendly in return, right?


I find that understandable considering Israel was fabricated out of nothing right in those neighbor's yards.
 
2012-08-19 01:29:28 AM
That's nice. Israel can do it's own dirty work for a change.
 
2012-08-19 01:43:06 AM

consider this: Frederick: I find that understandable considering Israel was fabricated out of nothing right in those neighbor's yards.

Which was voted on and approved by the United Nations.



So what the UN has to say about Israel is what we should be adhering to?
 
2012-08-19 01:45:33 AM

consider this: Frederick: I find that understandable considering Israel was fabricated out of nothing right in those neighbor's yards.

Which was voted on and approved by the United Nations.


It's a good thing that Israel always respects United Nations resolutions then, isn't it? Oh wait...
 
2012-08-19 01:48:21 AM

consider this: Frederick: I find that understandable considering Israel was fabricated out of nothing right in those neighbor's yards.

Which was voted on and approved by the League of Nations.


FIFY
 
2012-08-19 01:51:14 AM

consider this: Frederick: I find that understandable considering Israel was fabricated out of nothing right in those neighbor's yards.

Which was voted on and approved by the United Nations.


Does that make it less understandable for you?
 
2012-08-19 01:58:06 AM

Lost Thought 00: They have no reason to truly be afraid. The US does not have the capability to occupy a country as large and powerful as Iran. Hell, we can't even accomplish that in Afghanistan. Iran has all the terrain issues Afghanistan does, plus a well organized military in place, and covers about 4 times as much area. The worst thing the US could do to Iran is drop a couple bombs, which would do nothing except piss off the international community and further isolate the US from it's traditional allies.


Bomb their airfields into uselessness, and then institute a naval blockade in the Arabian sea and an air blockade on the Caspian. Where are they going to get food from? To the East is the lawless portion of Pakistan. Turkey doesn't like 'em. Azerbaijan is an ally of Israel's. We have a major base in Turkmenistan- no way do they piss us off. Iraq and Afghanistan? Whoops. What does that leave, Armenia? That's an interesting case there- I'm betting they don't get involved.

We've been setting this up for almost 20 years now. I don't know if the U.S. and Israel are going to actually do it, but they certainly can. I don't think any of our traditional allies will care, outside of France wringing their hands and not letting us use their airspace. The main problem is that the Russians consider the Caspian their territory. They are not going to be happy about this.
 
2012-08-19 02:00:13 AM
The leaders of Iran have said outright they will destroy Israel as soon as they can do it. So why is Israel the bad guys for wanting to prevent that?
 
2012-08-19 02:18:06 AM

ecmoRandomNumbers: Israel is a political mistake made in 1948. We could've saved the world a lot of trouble by just giving them Florida. The older ones already own a significant portion of it, anyway. We could have 49 five-pointed stars and one Star of David on our flag.


We'd still have the troubles. except that Florida-as-Israel would want to nuke South Carolina instead of Iran after they brought a nuclear power plant online
 
2012-08-19 02:42:10 AM

OgreMagi: The leaders of Iran have said outright they will destroy Israel as soon as they can do it. So why is Israel the bad guys for wanting to prevent that?

 

If I say I'm going to kick your ass, does that give you the right to kill me?
 
2012-08-19 02:52:42 AM

OgreMagi: The leaders of Iran have said outright they will destroy Israel as soon as they can do it. So why is Israel the bad guys for wanting to prevent that?


Citation?

All I've ever seen are Israeli sources claiming such. I can provide far more sources of Israel threatening Iran. This article we are commenting on is one.....
 
2012-08-19 02:55:47 AM

Notabunny: You want to really piss off Ahmadinejad? Take all the money we'd normally spend killing his citizens and instead airlift in a bunch of schools and hospitals and water treatment plants and highways and a couple of high speed interwebs. That'd piss him off real good.


I wonder what it would be like if, 20 years ago, America had offered to sell Iran nuke reactors.
 
2012-08-19 03:01:29 AM

RoyBatty: 2wolves: RoyBatty: And don't be afraid to ask questions.

How long would Israel exist without U.S. foreign aid?

Beats me. Their GDP is $242.93 B, I believe our aid to them is $3B so presumably forever (??), but I am not sure of your point or its relevance to this article....


The MONETARY aid is somewhere around $3B. We give them FAR more than that in military hardware. Of course, they make a pretty penny by selling some of it (as well as any secrets that Mossad gleans about the US) to China.

Without US aid, including the hardware we GIVE to Israel for free, Israel would be farked. All those pretty jets, helicopters, jets, and munitions, well... they might actually have to start BUYING them!
 
2012-08-19 03:02:25 AM
"You said jets twice"
"I like jets".

Second "jets" should read "tanks".
 
2012-08-19 03:05:10 AM

OgreMagi: The leaders of Iran have said outright they will destroy Israel as soon as they can do it. So why is Israel the bad guys for wanting to prevent that?


If some guy is full of bluster and, in order to show off, says he's going to kill you. He doesn't say this TO you, he just says it to his friends. You hear about this, and you set a bomb in his house, blow the fark out of his house and three other nearby houses, not only killing the guy but his family and the families of his neighbors.

So who's the bad guy?
 
2012-08-19 03:17:31 AM

LincolnLogolas: OgreMagi: The leaders of Iran have said outright they will destroy Israel as soon as they can do it. So why is Israel the bad guys for wanting to prevent that?

If some guy is full of bluster and, in order to show off, says he's going to kill you. He doesn't say this TO you, he just says it to his friends. You hear about this, and you set a bomb in his house, blow the fark out of his house and three other nearby houses, not only killing the guy but his family and the families of his neighbors.

So who's the bad guy?


Seriously?
 
2012-08-19 03:18:13 AM

LincolnLogolas: OgreMagi: The leaders of Iran have said outright they will destroy Israel as soon as they can do it. So why is Israel the bad guys for wanting to prevent that?

If some guy is full of bluster and, in order to show off, says he's going to kill you. He doesn't say this TO you, he just says it to his friends. You hear about this, and you set a bomb in his house, blow the fark out of his house and three other nearby houses, not only killing the guy but his family and the families of his neighbors.

So who's the bad guy?


----------

Is the other guy a muslim?
 
2012-08-19 03:25:37 AM

themindiswatching: See? Fartbongo made us look weak and pathetic! Vote for a REAL man, one who will show the world who's boss by bombing the shiat out of it.


You know, if rmoney actually promised to nuke iran into the worlds largest pool of glass and promised to kill himself if it wasnt done by the first 10 days of his presidency, well, I would probably vote for him.
because either way we would solve one problem.

shudder
just what we need yet another war
 
2012-08-19 03:35:27 AM
As an American I proudly say fark the middle east jew arab struggle. They can kill each other for all I care.
 
2012-08-19 03:51:38 AM
Israel made their bed.

Let them lie in it.
 
2012-08-19 04:07:33 AM

GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.


Hey, Israel. While we're busying with Afghanistan, why don't you invade Iran for us? Oh, you don't have the resources and the military might to actually do it? Then:

www.hitupmyspot.com
 
2012-08-19 04:23:35 AM
All of this engineered to affect a US presidential election.

It sounds like one of those anti-semitic "canards" we hear so much about.
 
2012-08-19 06:29:24 AM
Israel is going to make all kinds of noise about Iran, but won't do anything, because Iran would strike back, and that would be the end of Israel.

Iran is going to make all kinds of noise about Israel, but won't do anything, because Israel would strike back, and that would be the end of Iran.

Russia and the US will sit on the sidelines and watch the verbal conflict, and won't get involved unless they absolutely have to, because the stakes are simply too high should they get involved in this particular shooting war. In the end, this is all a bunch of noise and fury for the election, and as long as Obama wins in November, no violence will occur. Obama knows we can't afford yet another war.

On the other hand, if Romney wins, there is big money for the military contractors if we back an Israeli strike on Iran. So that's all the reason I need - although I have plenty more reasons available - to vote for Obama. Romney and the GOP will keep us in continual wars, Obama is getting us out of the wars the GOP started, and didn't even bother to try to pay for during Bush's regime.
 
2012-08-19 06:30:41 AM

WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?


Since I left active duty US military service

I've have always had friends in active combat zones

From Panama to
Desert Storm
to Bosnia
And back to the Middle east again

Not Special Forces commandos, everyday hard working M1A1 tank commanders.

My son is 18 and the US has always been at war with someone in his lifetime

robrimes.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-08-19 07:33:14 AM

RoyBatty: 2wolves: RoyBatty: And don't be afraid to ask questions.

How long would Israel exist without U.S. foreign aid?

Beats me. Their GDP is $242.93 B, I believe our aid to them is $3B so presumably forever (??), but I am not sure of your point or its relevance to this article....


It's the type of aid (military and technological items that can't be obtained anywhere else), not the dollar amount that is important. Many of the weapons they use come from US. They have also want 'bunker buster' bombs now as well.

As for the actual amount, it's higher because we spend some number placating their neighbors as well.

We will be dragged into fighting Iran, whether we want to or not. Israel will find some sort of pretext and we will come running.
 
2012-08-19 07:40:54 AM

themindiswatching: See? Fartbongo made us look weak and pathetic! Vote for a REAL man, one who will show the world who's boss by bombing the shiat out of it.


Bush was a R.E.A.L. man and look where that got us.
 
2012-08-19 07:59:54 AM

2wolves: RoyBatty: And don't be afraid to ask questions.

How long would Israel exist without U.S. foreign aid?


For as long as women love diamonds.
 
2012-08-19 08:07:02 AM
Well, I think he is spot on. I don't believe that Iran is scared that Obama is going to try and stop their nuclear program.

Whether that's a good thing or not is up to debate, but as far as just how factual this statement is, I don't think there's a debate to be had.
 
2012-08-19 08:15:23 AM
Israel, the passive aggressive psychotic ex-wife of the Middle East.

Always the victim.

Always getting larger.
 
2012-08-19 08:20:57 AM

Captain_Ballbeard: Israel, the passive aggressive psychotic ex-wife of the Middle East.

Always the victim.

Always getting larger.


Anti-Semite!
 
2012-08-19 08:22:43 AM

Dwight_Yeast: Lunchlady: Who cares? Let them sort themselves out.

Well, the problem is that one of the two people who is in the running to be our next President has promised again and again that he'll give Israel carte blanc.

/won't tell you which one
//I'll surprise you


Both. Only a child believes otherwise. Only and poorly informed child.
 
2012-08-19 08:39:00 AM
Get Ahmadinejad and Netanyahu to agree to meet in some Scandinavian country for "peace talks." Blow the site to smithereens and make it look like Sunni terrorists were responsible. Pop popcorn and sit back.

/joking, kinda.
 
2012-08-19 08:45:04 AM

Makh: We keep offering Iran a choice and they always pick cake. We're going to run out of cake at this rate.


Yellow cake?
 
2012-08-19 08:50:19 AM
FTA: "The United States can do it when it finally understands that negotiations will get nothing from the Iranians and that the sanctions are not achieving what is necessary," Yadlin said. "I am one of those who believes that President Obama understands the American interests regarding Iran, regarding the proliferation that would follow if Iran goes nuclear. The next day the Saudis, the Turks and after that maybe Egypt and Iraq [would seek to go nuclear]. There is no American president who wants the NPT [the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] to collapse on his watch and for Iran to be the Middle East hegemon because it is nuclear...

That's rich, coming from Israel
 
2012-08-19 08:52:01 AM

indylaw: Get Ahmadinejad and Netanyahu to agree to meet in some Scandinavian country for "peace talks." Blow the site to smithereens and make it look like Sunni terrorists were responsible. Pop popcorn and sit back.

/joking, kinda.


i18.photobucket.com

My, you are a clever one. i LIKE you.
 
2012-08-19 08:56:50 AM

Tatsuma: Well, I think he is spot on. I don't believe that Iran is scared that Obama is going to try and stop their nuclear program.

Whether that's a good thing or not is up to debate, but as far as just how factual this statement is, I don't think there's a debate to be had.


As far as the world knows, their nuclear program is for energy.

Theoretically wouldn't one countries right to technology be as fundamental as another countries right to exist?
 
2012-08-19 09:17:45 AM

Tatsuma: Well, I think he is spot on. I don't believe that Iran is scared that Obama is going to try and stop their nuclear program.

Whether that's a good thing or not is up to debate, but as far as just how factual this statement is, I don't think there's a debate to be had.


Why would Obama try to stop Iran. You guys are doing all the work for once... and we like it very much that way.
 
2012-08-19 09:24:55 AM

indylaw: Get Ahmadinejad and Netanyahu to agree to meet in some Scandinavian country for "peace talks." Blow the site to smithereens and make it look like Sunni terrorists were responsible. Pop popcorn and sit back.

/joking, kinda.


www.starscolor.com
Nah, have em meet in Moscow. In ten days I'll have a war on with those Communist bastards, and I'll make it look like THEIR fault.
 
2012-08-19 09:30:26 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com
/frowns
 
2012-08-19 09:41:53 AM

Weaver95: Iran is simply not afraid of the United States, says Israel's former military intelligence chief

*looks at a map*

meh. not our problem.



you got that right.

why should Isreal have to deal with them when they can sucker the U.S. into dealing with them. the U.S. is a sucker and throws Billions away every year dealing with Isreal and what Isreal wants.

but i guess its ok to throw Billions away on Isreal. its OUR tax money, not the one's who's throwing it away.

Go USA!! Freedomland!
 
2012-08-19 09:43:52 AM

GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.



they own many of our Congressmen so they can continue to partially run our Foreign policy. after all, they know the U.S.A. is a sucker.
 
2012-08-19 09:44:44 AM

Lunchlady: Who cares? Let them sort themselves out.




but that would be spreading Freedom and Democracy around the world. we can't have that.
 
2012-08-19 09:45:58 AM
Simple solution: drop a 55 gallon drum of pig blood and entrails someplace innocuous in Iran and accompany it with a threat to do the same to the Tomb of Ali and the entire city of Qom unless all centrifuges are immediately smashed and displayed in the open for satellite inspection and all nuclear development sites are opened for international inspection. There are several advantages to this approach:

1. It would be highly effective. Even if the Iranians choose to take their chances on ritual defilement, that will signal a change in their culture that in itself represents an unprecedented improvement. It conveys the fact that we recognize this as a religious war (which it has always been from their point of view, whatever we might think) and have the means, the methods and the motives to undermine their religion. Before you take issue with this, keep in mind that from their point of view we worship money and the attack on the World Trade Centers was intended as an attack on our religion.
2., It is both humane and cheap.
3. These are specificallu Shi'a sites (there are lots of them!) to which the Sunnis will not object.
4. It will make the Sunnis think twice about messing with us, given that their holy places are just as defenseless as the Iranian ones.
 
2012-08-19 09:46:50 AM

AliceBToklasLives: Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?

You are not about to use foreign aid to Israel as a metric to defend your argument, are you? You might want to rethink this.

Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?



Why??

because Israel is the "Jewish Nation" and our Congress has alot of Jewish influence in it, even though the percentage of Jews in this Nation is very low.

Money talks, baby. and money owns OUR CONgress.
 
2012-08-19 09:49:02 AM

Linux_Yes: AliceBToklasLives: Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?

You are not about to use foreign aid to Israel as a metric to defend your argument, are you? You might want to rethink this.

Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?


Why??

because Israel is the "Jewish Nation" and our Congress has alot of Jewish influence in it, even though the percentage of Jews in this Nation is very low.

Money talks, baby. and money owns OUR CONgress.


Money and the power of information. American Media does not always work for America, sometimes it's working for its other country.
 
2012-08-19 10:07:18 AM

shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran Tel Aviv wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket Bibi.



wow how does that shoe feel on the other foot?
 
2012-08-19 10:09:30 AM
If we go to war with Iran
Romneys sons should put their hides on the line to defend what their father believes

www.themortonreport.com

/Aaron can do it, and he was some kind of singer
 
2012-08-19 10:11:50 AM
profile.ak.fbcdn.net

Land war in Asia you say?
 
2012-08-19 10:34:18 AM

Captain_Ballbeard: Linux_Yes: AliceBToklasLives: Party Boy: AliceBToklasLives: Sure - that's why U.S. aid to Israel has gone down dramatically since 1990. Why send massive amounts of aid - far, far more than anyone else -- to a country with which we are at odds?

You are not about to use foreign aid to Israel as a metric to defend your argument, are you? You might want to rethink this.

Why does the United States send Israel so much foreign aid? Did we just pick a name out of a hat?


Why??

because Israel is the "Jewish Nation" and our Congress has alot of Jewish influence in it, even though the percentage of Jews in this Nation is very low.

Money talks, baby. and money owns OUR CONgress.

Money and the power of information. American Media does not always work for America, sometimes it's working for its other country.



American "news" media works for the large corporations who own it. the hell with the nation and the "little people".
 
2012-08-19 10:40:56 AM

clambam: accompany it with a threat to do the same



Ah, the extortionist approach. Smooooooth.

/or would that be the terrorist approach?
 
2012-08-19 10:46:50 AM

consider this: LectertheChef: Never said they were, but it's important to remember that Israel has always been just as bad, if not worse, than the people they keep telling us to hate.

I disagree. Even if Israel sits back and does nothing, eventually they get some rockets launched their way or a suicide bomber or two blowing themselves up. Israel responds to aggression, they don't initiate it.


Israel never sits back and does nothing. While you are giving them praise for "doing nothing", they are taking the homes and land of thousands of Palestinians.
 
2012-08-19 10:51:29 AM

Rich Cream: clambam: accompany it with a threat to do the same


Ah, the extortionist approach. Smooooooth.

/or would that be the terrorist approach?


That would be the effective approach, the clever approach and the cheap approach. It would be sabre-rattling (which we're doing already), accompanied by a glimpse of the sabre.
 
2012-08-19 11:05:47 AM
Incidentally, aren't the current sanctions "the extortionist approach"? And the terrorist approach would be to simply do it with no warning--drench the holy sites of Iran in filth accompanied by a hearty "fark you." You'd rather see what? A full scale war? The State of Israel wiped from the face of the earth? In that case may I proffer you a hearty "fark you" as well.
 
2012-08-19 11:07:22 AM

clambam: Rich Cream: clambam: accompany it with a threat to do the same


Ah, the extortionist approach. Smooooooth.

/or would that be the terrorist approach?

That would be the effective approach, the clever approach and the cheap approach. It would be sabre-rattling (which we're doing already), accompanied by a glimpse of the sabre.



So, terrorism is effective. I agree.

/not so clever though
//and cheap? you said it, not me.
 
2012-08-19 11:10:18 AM

clambam: Incidentally, aren't the current sanctions "the extortionist approach"?


Yes.


And the terrorist approach would be to simply do it with no warning

So by telling someone you're going to beat them up before you do so negates the beating in some manner?


/don't bother putting words in my mouth about Israel and maps. Won't work.
 
2012-08-19 11:14:31 AM

clambam: Incidentally, aren't the current sanctions "the extortionist approach"?


Are you really making this argument?
JTA J Street has a dependable cadre of 40-50 members of the U.S. House of Representatives ready to heed its voting recommendations. Congressional insiders say J Street's green light in December for Iran sanctions nudged the bill from the super majority that traditional lobbying by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee usually turns out to officially "overwhelming": 412-12. That sent the Obama administration a clear message to hurry it on up, the insiders say.

AP Dec 2011 The powerful pro-Israel lobby and a leading Jewish advocacy group on Wednesday endorsed tough sanctions on Iran's Central Bank as Congress wrestles with an Obama administration plea to ease the impact of the penalties to avoid driving up oil prices.

In a letter to lawmakers, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee said the sanctions would contribute to the U.S. effort to pressure Tehran economically and could dissuade Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon. Separately, the American Jewish Committee wrote to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta backing the penalties that would target foreign financial institutions that do business with the Central Bank.

Last week, the Senate voted 100-0 for an amendment by Sens. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., and Bob Menendez, D-N.J., to add the sanctions to a broad defense bill. House and Senate negotiators are meeting this week to try to iron out the differences between their respective bills and produce a final version of the legislation for President Barack Obama's signature.

NJ Jewish News Menendez said their opposition undermined a compromise he struck with Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) on legislation that was eventually passed in the Senate by a vote of 100-0.
The White House countered that the Kirk-Menendez amendment could actually help the Iranian economy if foreign banks resisted American unilateral efforts.
This week Menendez stood by his approach on sanctions, which he developed in consultation with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Are you saying groups like AIPAC are engaging in extortion?
 
2012-08-19 11:14:48 AM

machodonkeywrestler: Israel never sits back and does nothing. While you are giving them praise for "doing nothing", they are taking the homes and land of thousands of Palestinians.


And creating 10s of thousands of jobs. Don't you get it yet?
 
2012-08-19 11:24:30 AM

Party Boy: Are you saying groups like AIPAC are engaging in extortion?


When you threaten to take something away from someone instead of rewarding them for doing what you want it's pretty damn close to extortion.
 
2012-08-19 11:32:01 AM
Couldn't we make a similar deal to the one Russia has with Iran? I'm sure the Russians know exactly what's going on over there because they're involved with it, and we could be too, very easily, but instead we need to speak loudly and swing a big dick around.

We could make sure it's isotopes for medical purposes and make the world a better place through improved medical care but nooooooo, fark you, we got ours. Now do as I say, biatch.
 
2012-08-19 11:36:02 AM

Rich Cream: Party Boy: Are you saying groups like AIPAC are engaging in extortion?

When you threaten to take something away from someone instead of rewarding them for doing what you want it's pretty damn close to extortion.


That guy wants to talk about the sanctions as a US thing, not something pushed through congress by groups like AIPAC over the complaints of the Obama admin.
 
2012-08-19 11:50:12 AM

ssa5: GAT_00: Israel needs to shut the fark up and quit being a warmonger.

Can....not....resist....comment........arrrrrggghh

You know who else was a warmonger?


That was the point.
 
2012-08-19 01:20:40 PM

clambam: Simple solution: drop a 55 gallon drum of pig blood and entrails someplace innocuous in Iran and accompany it with a threat to do the same to the Tomb of Ali and the entire city of Qom unless all centrifuges are immediately smashed and displayed in the open for satellite inspection and all nuclear development sites are opened for international inspection. There are several advantages to this approach:

1. It would be highly effective. Even if the Iranians choose to take their chances on ritual defilement, that will signal a change in their culture that in itself represents an unprecedented improvement. It conveys the fact that we recognize this as a religious war (which it has always been from their point of view, whatever we might think) and have the means, the methods and the motives to undermine their religion. Before you take issue with this, keep in mind that from their point of view we worship money and the attack on the World Trade Centers was intended as an attack on our religion.
2., It is both humane and cheap.
3. These are specificallu Shi'a sites (there are lots of them!) to which the Sunnis will not object.
4. It will make the Sunnis think twice about messing with us, given that their holy places are just as defenseless as the Iranian ones.


I hate to say this: YOUR IDEA IS PERFECT!
Plus even if you dropped the blood on what ever site, they can clean it up. sure they will be upset, but it wont destroy the site ...
bwhahahahahahahahahahahahha

EPIC trolling of muslims !!!
 
2012-08-19 02:06:45 PM
Problem: Israel's constant belligerency.

Solution: Glass parking lot the whole damn country and blame it on a snafu caused by Chinese made electronics.
 
2012-08-19 03:09:29 PM
Israel are farking bloodsuckers. And no their "testing" of our weapons does not earn their keep. They've gotten us into a shiatload more trouble than they're worth and they're still using the farking Holocaust to deride anyone who says anything unfavorable about them.
 
2012-08-19 04:06:40 PM
i3.kym-cdn.com
 
2012-08-19 06:00:35 PM

King Something: Jim_Callahan: There's something strange in the world when there are two states having a political conflict in the middle east and the one we're supporting is the oppressive theocracy that's officially an apartheid state instead of the oppressive theocracy that's actively trying to improve the quality of life for its poorer citizens.

//Then, I guess there's not really a right choice there.

Two reasons we're supporting the apartheid state instead of the one that at least pretends to care about its second-class citizens:

1) We need to be buddy-buddy with Israel so that when (not "if") that temple in Jerusalem gets destroyed, Jesus™ will return and all the good Christians in America will get raptored into Heaven™. This offer for a free ticket into Heaven™ is valid for all people who practice American Evangelical Fundamentalist Christianity.
2) anybody who does not fully, unconditionally, unquestioningly and unwaveringly support Israel in every last thing they do is an anti-semite who wears full SS regalia and chisel swastikas into the sides of synagogues every chance they get; likewise, anybody who lays even an iota of blame on Israel w/r/t their conflict with the Palestinians is a Nazi-cosplaying, swastika-carving Jew hater. There is absolutely no grey area between the two extremes of "loving Israel more than America or your own family" and "hating Jews with the fury of a thousand suns" whatsoever.

You can thank those New American Century cockgoblins and AIPAC for all this.

 


Now who can argue with that?
 
2012-08-19 06:10:02 PM

Notabunny: PlasticMoby: You know, Israelis are nice people and all but that being said fark THEM. They're big boys and girls. Let them take care of their own shiat for a change.

No, no. Stick with the first part. And then try to figure out how to help the nice people, who, by the way, think we're nice people, too.



Let me guess - by blasting the shiat out of Iran - and every other enemy that Israel makes.

And when it comes to making enemies, Izzy seems uniquely talented, doesn't she? Whips 'em up from scratch in a jiffy, she does.

And she's not stingy with them either. In fact, America would have a lot fewer enemies were it not for Israel's willingness to "share".

One note of caution: If we suddenly stop schlepping Izzy's water for her, we could very well end up becoming one of her enemies.

Do you think we could handle that kind of rejection?
 
2012-08-19 09:36:59 PM
Really, Iran (through Israeli proxy)? The only think this country seems to be good at is blowing sh*t up and totally f*cking up other countries.

Go ahead, tempt us. We probably need to clear out some inventory anyway.


/this is a sad country where the only thing we're good at is war.
 
2012-08-20 12:09:37 PM

shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.


No, no it wouldn't. In fact it would probably drive Iran to make a very nasty counter attack involving chemical or biological weapons.
 
2012-08-20 08:46:33 PM

Party Boy: clambam: Incidentally, aren't the current sanctions "the extortionist approach"?

Are you really making this argument?JTA J Street has a dependable cadre of 40-50 members of the U.S. House of Representatives ready to heed its voting recommendations. Congressional insiders say J Street's green light in December for Iran sanctions nudged the bill from the super majority that traditional lobbying by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee usually turns out to officially "overwhelming": 412-12. That sent the Obama administration a clear message to hurry it on up, the insiders say.

AP Dec 2011 The powerful pro-Israel lobby and a leading Jewish advocacy group on Wednesday endorsed tough sanctions on Iran's Central Bank as Congress wrestles with an Obama administration plea to ease the impact of the penalties to avoid driving up oil prices.

In a letter to lawmakers, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee said the sanctions would contribute to the U.S. effort to pressure Tehran economically and could dissuade Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon. Separately, the American Jewish Committee wrote to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta backing the penalties that would target foreign financial institutions that do business with the Central Bank.

Last week, the Senate voted 100-0 for an amendment by Sens. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., and Bob Menendez, D-N.J., to add the sanctions to a broad defense bill. House and Senate negotiators are meeting this week to try to iron out the differences between their respective bills and produce a final version of the legislation for President Barack Obama's signature.

NJ Jewish News Menendez said their opposition undermined a compromise he struck with Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) on legislation that was eventually passed in the Senate by a vote of 100-0.
The White House countered that the Kirk-Menendez amendment could actually help the Iranian economy if foreign banks resisted American unilateral efforts.
This week Menendez stood by his appro ...


No, but you are apparently. Look, we're really sorry we rubbed your nose in your complicity in that terrible crime you guys committed last century. Believe me, no one knows more than Jews about how awful it is to feel guilty all the time. It would have been nice if the US and Britain had taken in more Jewish refugees rather than sending them back to Germany to die horribly, it would have been nice if the Ukrainians and French had taken a page from the Dutch and courageously protected their Jews rather than gleefully participated in their mass murder. But they didn't. Now, sixty odd years later, you're so tired of being reminded of what heartless racist scumbags you are, you find it necessary to demonize the victims of your crimes. You've invented an alternate victim on whom to heap your sympathy, leaving yourselves clear to participate once again in an attempt to annhilate the Jews. Justify it to yourself however you like. You're still a murdering fascist pig whatever purported politics you choose to camouflage it under and however you choose to defend your blatant antisemtiism.
 
2012-08-20 09:43:28 PM

shotglasss: WizardofToast: What's in it for us, a country that has spent over a trillion to go to war for over a decade?

One nuke on Teheran wouldn't cost near that much and would instantly take all the fight out of Ahadinnahjacket.


Or the survivors\nearby allies will begin nuclear winter.

Y'know. Small chance, right? Not like killing a bunch of people ever pisses off the survivors, right? After all, a nuke strike is just a spanking, I'm sure they'll take it like a big boy.
 
Displayed 186 of 186 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report