Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Ending US military aid to Israel?


and-then

Recommended Posts

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=16795

As all here know, I'm a staunch supporter of the Jewish state.  Most also know my reasoning so no need to revisit THAT unpleasantness ;)  I read this Daniel Pipes article though and it made a lot of sense to me.  What about it? Is, as they say in Israel hayom yom?  I'm sure that for many here that's like asking is water wet but remember, that aid benefits more than Israel and US defense contractors.  It also means a margin of control over them.  Thoughts?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

We are likely to see more of this type of opinion piece as Israel and the West come to grips with the reality that the present trajectory of US aid to Israel is unsustainable.  The Fed petro-dollar is dying fast, economies around the world are in turmoil, and the "Assad must go" gambit of Middle East takeover appears to be dead.  NATO has become an irrelevant (yet still dangerous) albatross around Europe's neck and the Ukraine debacle a dismal failure for the West.  From Libya to Iraq to Syria to Ukraine, the western attempts to reshape the world via regime-change and terrorist proxies have left nothing but death, destruction, and human misery.  The Israelis are smart enough to see that their militarism in the region is paying diminishing returns at this point, and it is time to make new friends and alliances.  My own opinion is that divisions within the Islamic world will eventually be smoothed over and Israel will be protected as an autonomous state as part of a larger regional settlement.  This would be the world's best chance at some form of lasting peace and if it happens, you can be sure Netanyahu will step forward to take the credit.

"If something cannot go on forever, it will stop,"  - Herbert Stein

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, simplybill said:

I just read this article from Jewish World Review this morning. In light of Hezbollah's renewed threats against Israel, I think this would be a bad time to abandon support for our only true democratic ally in the Middle East. 

http://jewishworldreview.com/0716/next_leabanon_war.php3

I think the threat of US intervention/ US arms for Israel should always remain a viable option for the state.  I just believe that removing the element of US control over the governments of Israel would be a positive move.  Israel now has a 300 billion dollar economy and some of the finest weapons makers on the planet.  3 or 4 billion dollars a year is not worth allowing someone like Oby or Hildebeast to put undue pressure on the people of Israel or their leaders when they are being threatened.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, and then said:

I think the threat of US intervention/ US arms for Israel should always remain a viable option for the state.  I just believe that removing the element of US control over the governments of Israel would be a positive move.  Israel now has a 300 billion dollar economy and some of the finest weapons makers on the planet.  3 or 4 billion dollars a year is not worth allowing someone like Oby or Hildebeast to put undue pressure on the people of Israel or their leaders when they are being threatened.

So what exactly are you trying to say... That America should stop giving aid cause it expects far too much from Israel or that the Israelis should stop accepting aid cause it comes with too many strings attached to it?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Leto_loves_melange said:

So what exactly are you trying to say... That America should stop giving aid cause it expects far too much from Israel or that the Israelis should stop accepting aid cause it comes with too many strings attached to it?  

A bit of both.  With a 300 billion dollar economy they don't need the headache of having people like US presidents, ANY US president telling them what they can and cannot do.  They are as sovereign a country as the US - UNTIL - they take charity.  Then they're on the hook.  Also, it would take away a huge crying point for the anit Israel types who berate them about the "aid" that 75% of goes to US contractors anyway.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, and then said:

A bit of both.  With a 300 billion dollar economy they don't need the headache of having people like US presidents, ANY US president telling them what they can and cannot do.  They are as sovereign a country as the US - UNTIL - they take charity.  Then they're on the hook.  Also, it would take away a huge crying point for the anit Israel types who berate them about the "aid" that 75% of goes to US contractors anyway.

I could be wrong but i think the state of Israel has pretty much done what it liked regardless of what the American Prez thinks or does. But I'm surprised, knowing your politics, on why you think forgoing 4 billion a year in exchange for avoiding a little criticism is a good deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could be a complicated proposition, considering that the Palestinian civilians in Israel also benefit from a strong IDF. (Iranian missiles won't discriminate between the Jewish and Palestinian citizens).

Also, unless foreign aid to the Palestinians is reduced proportionately, it could appear that the US has begun funding terrorism: 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_aid_to_Palestinians

Mr. Pipes does have a legitimate proposal,  but it would be a political minefield.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Leto_loves_melange said:

I could be wrong but i think the state of Israel has pretty much done what it liked regardless of what the American Prez thinks or does. But I'm surprised, knowing your politics, on why you think forgoing 4 billion a year in exchange for avoiding a little criticism is a good deal. 

In the past, that is, until the current president, Israel and the US have had a decent relationship where they rarely ever "left the reservation" on issues in public and more often than not they acceded when a president told them they need to refrain from an action.  The instances lately are tied directly to a US president disrespecting the state and her leaders in public.  To think that Israel has "pretty much done what it liked"  reflects a belief (I think) that they already DO more than they "should".  That of course is a matter of perspective.  I feel sure that in the past until now if one could sit in on private debates in Knesset or councils of the president one would see many times that a paltry 3 or 4 billion makes the deciding vote.  But NOW I believe they would benefit from refusing the military aid AND the strings.  It might be difficult to convince those Israelis who benefit from the aid but it would be FAR more volatile dealing with the US defense contractors.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, and then said:

In the past, that is, until the current president, Israel and the US have had a decent relationship where they rarely ever "left the reservation" on issues in public and more often than not they acceded when a president told them they need to refrain from an action.  The instances lately are tied directly to a US president disrespecting the state and her leaders in public.  To think that Israel has "pretty much done what it liked"  reflects a belief (I think) that they already DO more than they "should".  That of course is a matter of perspective.  I feel sure that in the past until now if one could sit in on private debates in Knesset or councils of the president one would see many times that a paltry 3 or 4 billion makes the deciding vote.  But NOW I believe they would benefit from refusing the military aid AND the strings.  It might be difficult to convince those Israelis who benefit from the aid but it would be FAR more volatile dealing with the US defense contractors.

Fair point mate. With all the uncertainty in Turkey and the Eastern Med and a new President in the not so distant future, Israel might be in a better position to push its reasons and points across.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caroline Glick wrote an in-depth article about the current negotiations over US aid to Israel. I was unaware of the disturbing problems with the F-35, especially the hacking potential.


"All F-35s all over the world will be required to log into the ALIS system to upload computer files after each flight and to check flight readiness. The ALIS is supposed to identify broken parts and help speed up repairs and handle mission data uploads.

ALIS has the capacity to prevent F-35s from taking off. ALIS can lock out pilots and ground crews if it sees danger. If this happens, maintenance technicians have to convince the computer that they either dealt with the issues the computer identified or that it was a false alarm.

Dan Grazier, a member of that panel, whose deliberations were reported by This Week, warned that this power renders the entire F-35 fleet vulnerable to hackers. If someone were able to convince the computer that something was wrong across the fleet, they might be able to keep all the F-35s grounded. Although the damage wouldn’t be permanent, it could continue long enough to cause the US or an ally to lose a battle or fail a mission.

For Israel, this vulnerability is prohibitive even if ALIS is ever made to work. The significance of ALIS control over all F-35s worldwide is that the US – and anyone able to hack the US system – will control the IAF. It will operate at the pleasure of the US government, and those able to hack US computers. They will be able to ground IAF planes whenever they wish."

__________________________

Read more at http://jewishworldreview.com/0716/glick072916.php3#DWmXmrR0d5SYKOtc.99

 


 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, simplybill said:

Caroline Glick wrote an in-depth article about the current negotiations over US aid to Israel. I was unaware of the disturbing problems with the F-35, especially the hacking potential.

Yeah, it's the Forbin Project crossed with Dark Star and Buck Rogers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well, I've always thought that US Military Aid was inteneded to...

  1. Keep Israel from developing competitive aircraft to endanger US international sales of F15's.
  2. Provide a 'back door' government subsidy to US weapons manufacturers.

Israel doesn't need F16's/F15's to combat HAMAS and Islamic Jihad... they could produce their own ground-attack aircraft.

In terms of defence against nations with advanced combat aircraft (Saudi Arabia's F16's, for example) Israel have already trumped the US in anti-aircraft systems; just look at Iron Dome !. And their Merkevah tanks are pretty much a match for Abrams A1M2's.

So... yes. I think the US SHOULD wind up annual military aide; Israel doesn't need it. But.. as I suggested... the military Aid is to benefit the USA as much as it benefits Israel, so I doubt it would be stopped.

Edited by RoofGardener
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My real concern is that if the  Obama administration withdraws the aid money, then it will be seen by nations hostile to Israel as a sign that Israel is no longer a protected ally of America. I'd feel better about withdrawing financial aid if it was done by a Republican administration. The Republicans have made it clear that Israel and America are allies, whereas the Democrats tend to waffle. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry too much about it simplybill. All of the Muslim nations combined couldn't defeat Israel in a "conventional" war. They've already tried this three times, and failed three times. They also know that Israel has nuclear weapons !

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

I wouldn't worry too much about it simplybill. All of the Muslim nations combined couldn't defeat Israel in a "conventional" war. They've already tried this three times, and failed three times. They also know that Israel has nuclear weapons !

OTOH, why risk military defeat when you can use the nations of Europe to accomplish the job for you through economic sanctions?  It's all poised to go and all it needs is Obama's acquiescence.  The sanctions would start slow and build.  Israel will vacate land needed for their security OR they will begin struggling to survive economically.  The only other choice is war.  Hizballah has roughly 120,000 rockets/missiles in southern Lebanon poised to rain hell on the citizens of Israel.  ALL the citizens of Israel.  Yes, given a little time I expect the IAF/IDF team will stop the onslaught but in the process thousands of Israelis and possibly tens of thousands of Lebanese will die or be maimed.  If Hamas joins in from Gaza I expect Gaza to be razed this time.  The death toll would be horrific.  At some point the people of Israel are finally going to grasp that they and their offspring are hated by most of the world and that they have ONLY themselves to rely on.  When they finally "get" that then it's apt to be a really bad day for the rest of us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I somehow doubt that sanctions - at the national level - would garner sufficient political support And Then. Consider how the BDS movement has petered out through lack of interest and/or support.

Obama (well, Hilary Clinton) would not get support from Congress for sanctions, nor Theresa May from Parliament.

After all the terrorist attacks, I doubt that the French or German governments could drum up support for Muslim anti-Israeli agitation; they would risk being associated with the terrorists.

I'm not sure about the European Union; I think that sanctions would require the approval of the European Parliament. With current public sentiment running high against the EU across Europe, I'm not sure they'd want to pour petrol on that particular fire at the moment, lest they risk more secession referendums !

In terms of war: Hezbollah may have 120,000 rockets and missiles (I doubt they HAVE, but lets run with it), but these are presumably in storage, deeply hidden in secret military locations. (you know... schools...hospitals etc ;P ). If they start getting large numbers of them ready to launch, then I suspect MOSSAD and Aman would notice it.

Anyway, even if Hezbollah managed to distribute 120,000 rockets to launch sites...which would be a logistical miracle... how many could they actually simultaneously launch ? I mean... how many fighters trained in rocketry does Hezbollah even HAVE ? In addition, Israel has a well-organised air defence system, incorporating anti-missile systems, counter-battery fire, military and civilian early-warning systems, and a civil defence network that must be the envy of the world. (and a population highly practiced and drilled at using it). Just how effective would those rockets be ? I suspect - in strategic terms - not very.

What they MIGHT be able to do is inflict sufficient civilian injury and death that the Jewish population of Israel go absolutely BIBLICAL in rage, and authorise the Knesset to cry Havoc, and unleash the IDF in a way the world has never seen before.

So... no. I don't think that the threat of reducing or removing USA military aide to Israel would be an existential threat to Israel, either in terms of an international boycot, or in terms of encouraging surrounding Islamic nations to attack.

 

Edited by RoofGardener
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

So... no. I don't think that the threat of reducing or removing USA military aide to Israel would be an existential threat to Israel, either in terms of an international boycot, or in terms of encouraging surrounding Islamic nations to attack.

I think we got crossed up somehow.  I didn't say X would lead to Y, I just explained how I felt the "neighbors" could attempt to achieve their goal without starting a war.  I think you're wrong on the sanctions aspect.  The EU leaders are primed to go if Israel does not give in.  The missile count is probably somewhat conservative and they are mostly already dispersed - and they are significantly more accurate now.  Not all of them of course but enough to cause mass death if industrial infrastructure  like gas and chemical storage areas were struck.  We agree on the rage factor though.  IDF generals have been warning for some time that the next Lebanon war (they KNOW it's coming) will be unlike anything anyone has seen before. They have openly said to Nasrallah that they know more about Hizballah's capabilities and location of forces than any military has ever known prior to conflict breaking out,  Bluster?  Some, I guess, but I'd REALLY hate to have my family living atop a missile storage site or launch facility when THIS one begins.  I think they could do all this without even resupply during the fighting.  The issue of resupply for some weapons systems might arise but if they began planning now they could transition to home grown systems within a decade or less.  No existential threat would come from telling a future US president to back off and mind his/her business IF Israel began preparing for that day NOW.  Of course the best solution would be for the US to just BE an ALLY as we have been in past.  Those days seem to be over though, so it's time to get ready for a new and more dangerous world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.