Criticism of U.S. swells in Israel

97silverlsc

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2004
Messages
952
Reaction score
0
Location
High Bridge, NJ
Criticism of U.S. swells in Israel
Threats growing, experts say
http://www.newsobserver.com/110/story/532407.html
Dion Nissenbaum, McClatchy Newspapers
JERUSALEM - After years of supporting the Bush administration's policy in the Middle East, a growing number of Israelis are openly criticizing the United States for creating more, not less, danger for Israel.

Israeli experts contend that American policies have destabilized Iraq, emboldened anti-Western forces from Iran to Lebanon and paved the way for militant Islamists to gain control of the Palestinian Authority.

"The threats to Middle East security and stability worsened in 2006," experts at Tel Aviv University's Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies recently warned. "The American failure in Iraq has hurt the standing of the U.S. in the Middle East."

Perhaps most strikingly, in their annual evaluation of the situation, the Israeli analysts concluded that it was better for the United States to get out of Iraq than to add troops, as President Bush is proposing.

"There's no Israeli interest being served by continued American presence in Iraq," said Mark A. Heller, a Jaffee Center researcher who helped produce the group's annual "Middle East Strategic Balance" report.

"There's a basic overall interest in not having the United States perceived as a weak or failing power," Heller said. "But any initial goals that might have been served by getting rid of Saddam Hussein have long since been banked."

The Bush administration is "simply discredited in the region as a player," Yossi Alpher said. Alpher, a former head of the Jaffee Center, now serves as co-director of www.bitterlemons.org, a joint Palestinian-Israeli Web site financed by private donations and a grant from the European Union.

Iran's status rises

Securing Israel, America's closest ally in the region, was one of the Bush administration's justifications for toppling Saddam and for promoting democracy throughout the region. Israel has been unwavering in its support of U.S. initiatives since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, from ousting the Taliban in Afghanistan to toppling Saddam and threatening Iran and Syria. The former Bush administration officials and advisers who pushed those initiatives are among Israel's staunchest American supporters.

But a growing number of Israeli experts now think that U.S. policy has backfired. The threat from Saddam's army has been replaced by the dangers of a volatile civil war that threatens to spill over Iraq's borders. By ousting both Saddam and the Taliban, the United States eliminated two major counterbalances to Iran, which now enjoys growing power and influence.

"When the United States removed Saddam Hussein from power, people were happy here because he represented a major threat," said Eytan Gilboa, a political science professor at Bar-Ilan University. "But that elevated the Iranian threat, and Iran is the most dangerous country in the world."

Israeli leaders now consider Iran to be their biggest and most pressing danger. Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, regularly antagonizes Israel by questioning whether the Holocaust happened and suggesting the Jewish nation will one day be wiped off the map.

Israel is expected to push the U.S. to ensure that Iran faces tough international sanctions for pressing ahead with its nuclear program, which Israel fears could provide one of its most vocal adversaries with a nuclear bomb.

Some argue that without the threat from Saddam, the international community is better positioned to deal with Iran.

"In the long run, I think this will help peace and security in the Middle East," said Daniel Ayalon, who served as Israel's ambassador to the United States during the Iraq invasion. "The fact that we do not have Saddam Hussein there allows the world to focus on the ayatollahs and Ahmadinejad."

Others, however, fear that America's obsession with Iraq prevents it from fully confronting Iran, which also backs Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. Hezbollah fought Israel last summer in a 34-day war that damaged Israel's image as an unbeatable military force.

"With American attention so much focused on Iraq, it comes at the expense of its ability to blunt the slow Iranian progression towards nuclear capability," said Uzi Arad, a former director of intelligence with Israel's Mossad. He now serves as head of the Institute for Policy Strategy at the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center in Israel.

Iran also has vowed to provide more funding for Hamas, the militant group committed to Israel's destruction that won last year's election to run the Palestinian Authority in Gaza and the West Bank.

Hamas gains power

For many Israelis, the ascension of Hamas is a bitter example of the Bush administration's flawed attempt to impose democratic principles on the Middle East.

"This is a big failure," Gilboa said. "I think that Americans too often equate democracy with elections, and they don't understand that elections should be the last step, not the first one."

Israel tried to delay last year's Palestinian elections when Hamas agreed to take part. Israelis leaders warned that they would never negotiate with a group committed to their nation's destruction.

But American officials worked with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to ensure that the election took place.

When Hamas won a majority and took control of the government, Israel, the United States and the international community cut off financial support to the Palestinian Authority, a move that hobbled the authority.

International isolation, however, has failed to compel Hamas to make significant concessions. Now the United States is launching a renewed effort to empower Abbas, the moderate Palestinian president whose weakened Fatah Party lost to Hamas last year.

U.S. plans

The United States is preparing to provide more monetary and military support for Abbas, a step that some worry could end up quickening the day when the near-daily clashes between Hamas and Fatah loyalists devolve into civil war.

Abbas is one ally whom Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hopes to enlist during her visit to the Middle East this weekend. She is working to create a coalition of moderate Middle East leaders who share U.S. fears that militant anti-Western forces are on the rise.

The Israeli government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert backs that effort. But Rice is likely to face greater skepticism in other countries in the region.

Last summer, both Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney found little appetite for the idea when they broached it with other Middle East leaders during Israel's war against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Heller suggested that American foreign policy once again had been undermined by the country's overconfidence.

"It's kind of a flattering image that Americans have of themselves and, frankly, that everyone has of America, that somehow the United States is capable of doing anything it sets its mind to and all it needs is political will," he said. "I think it's a total misreading of reality."
 
There's no Israeli interest being served by continued American presence in Iraq

Wrong. The Israelis have more to fear considering their close proximity to Iraq.

The American failure in Iraq has hurt the standing of the U.S. in the Middle East."

Who the fvck said we failed? I think we kicked ass in Iraq. Just because a bunch of whiners with an agenda want us to fail, doesn't mean we have failed.

By ousting both Saddam and the Taliban, the United States eliminated two major counterbalances to Iran, which now enjoys growing power and influence.

Come again? We toppled two potential allies in a terrorist network that could work togather to conduct total fvcking chaos against both Israel and the United States. Ahmedhenijad is currently forging alliances with American-hating communist parties in South American regions (ie Donkey Kong-- oh, I mean, Hugo Chavez, other socialist swine who are taking over S. America). What wannabe strategist moron wrote this article, anyway? :shifty:

Others, however, fear that America's obsession with Iraq prevents it from fully confronting Iran, which also backs Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. Hezbollah fought Israel last summer in a 34-day war that damaged Israel's image as an unbeatable military force.

More bullsh1t. Israel kicked ass in Lebanon. The only thing they did wrong was withdraw :gr_devil:
 
What the hell is "a growing number."

Is that scientific figure? Is that a majority even, or is it a growing minority?

Are these the same "growing number" of Israeli's that supported over the turning over of lands to Palestinians? Or the ones, along with the American Jews, who donated millions of dollars to build green houses and infrastructure in the territories that were turned over, ONLY TO WATCH THEM BE DESTROYED by the Palestinians within the first few days.
 
Calabrio said:
What the hell is "a growing number."

Is that scientific figure? Is that a majority even, or is it a growing minority?

Are these the same "growing number" of Israeli's that supported over the turning over of lands to Palestinians? Or the ones, along with the American Jews, who donated millions of dollars to build green houses and infrastructure in the territories that were turned over, ONLY TO WATCH THEM BE DESTROYED by the Palestinians within the first few days.

Hey, don't you criticize these numbers! The number grew from two people to three people! That's a jump of 50%, so get over it, the Israelis want us gone! <sarcasm off>
 
evillally said:
Come again? We toppled two potential allies in a terrorist network that could work togather to conduct total fvcking chaos against both Israel and the United States. Ahmedhenijad is currently forging alliances with American-hating communist parties in South American regions (ie Donkey Kong-- oh, I mean, Hugo Chavez, other socialist swine who are taking over S. America). What wannabe strategist moron wrote this article, anyway? :shifty:
The statement in that article is right on, in spite of your simplistic assessment of the situation. You do understand that there are more players than just "the terrorists" and "everybody else" don't you? Iran has a Shiite majority and government. Iraq also has a Shiite majority, but it had a Sunni government, which, as we know, didn't have the best realations with Iran. The Taliban were/are also Sunni. Iran has given support to the Northern Alliance in the past to try and take down the Taliban.

Now, Iran is now one of Afghanistan's biggest trading partners, and Karzai recently made a trip there. Maliki, a Shiite, is also mending relations with Iran. It is no secret that the Iraqi government is filled with pro-Iranian elements. Here's a good primer on just how tangled a web this is, and a prediction of where this could likely lead:

http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/press.asp?cat_id=6&rls_id=217

evillally said:
More bullsh1t. Israel kicked ass in Lebanon. The only thing they did wrong was withdraw :gr_devil:
Again, you focus exclusively on the military aspect and fail to take into account any sort of political consequences. In 2005, the people of Lebanon rose up, on their own, and threw out the Syrian forces and demanded new elections. They elected a government that is considered to be friendly to the western world. Our own government praised the turn of events.

Hezbollah, with the support of Iran, then started the most recent conflict with Israel by lobbing bombs over the border. We all know how it went from there.

Besides doing immense damage to the infrastructure of a country that we had supposedly supported (a tragedy in itself), the Israeli invasion did even worse damage to the "hearts and minds" of the Lebanese people. Hezbollah came out as the heros, and it sparked new demonstrations by pro-Syrian, pro-Hezbollah groups that dwarfed earlier demonstrations. Continuing the onslaught would not have improved that situation unless you, like Fossten, think they should have just flattened the entire country.
 
And you fail to realize that the article merely quotes some "expert's" opinion. There is no way to substantiate whether or not the "supposed" anti-US sentiment is growing in the ISRAELI population. Don't be such a sucker.

There is no doubt that the way things are going in Iraq has had a negative effect on Israel. Thanks to the anti-US media, the whole freaking world thinks we're losing in Iraq. The only people who actually know we're winning are the soldiers and generals in Iraq. My money's on them.

I see you have allied yourself with the mespocks of this forum, who believe that Israel should just lay down and allow themselves to be attacked without retaliation. I've got news for you, if we hadn't pressured Israel to stop the invasion, and if their prime minister wasn't such a p*ssy, they would have wiped out the Hezbos by now. And Iran would be in open war, which would be a good thing, b/c they wouldn't be able to duck and hide anymore.
 
ontinuing the onslaught would not have improved that situation unless you, like Fossten, think they should have just flattened the entire country.

That's my point; I'm not here to win any "hearts and minds". Flatten the land and salt the Earth...
 
Perhaps the Israelis should man up and start helping us instead of whining about us making them unsafe. They don't have many friends in the world, they better stick by us.
 
b34nz said:
Perhaps the Israelis should man up and start helping us instead of whining about us making them unsafe. They don't have many friends in the world, they better stick by us.

This article is an unfair representation of the Israeli population. The fact that Netenyahu stands a very good chance of being the next Prime Minister again demonstrates this.
 
Calabrio said:
This article is an unfair representation of the Israeli population. The fact that Netenyahu stands a very good chance of being the next Prime Minister again demonstrates this.

What we need is for Netanyahu to be the next President of the United States. This has got to be the only leader on the planet who REALLY understands the threat of Islamofascism.
 

Members online

Back
Top