What is Digg?Sponsored by IGN
41 Comments
- ajgasper, on 01/28/2009, -3/+44So what are the best strategic and national interests of the United States? If it's Israel, we need to cut the Arab countries loose. If it's the Arab world, we need to cut Israel loose. To fight the bin Laden's, we need the Arab World. For oil we need the Arab World. So why are we supporting Israel? Is it because of religious influence and bias to the detriment of the citizens of the US, and standing within the international community. It seems to me this is a no brainer, unless of course there are foreign countries influencing politicians through bribes (PAC's), and manipulation of the masses (press).
- damack, on 01/28/2009, -2/+37The US needs to ditch Israel and quickly.
Whats going on in the Middle East that you rarely hear about is a big tug of war beween the USA and China and so far China is winning.
For one China has a better future than the USA so its a safer bet and two it isn't pro-Israeli.
China is actually one of the biggest supporters of Palestine on the planet.
There was an article recently published in which Hu Jintao the leader of China said he firmly supported the cause of the Palestinians and to quote "Hu noted that China is one of the first countries that lent support to the Palestine National Liberation Movement and recognized the state of Palestine."
While China isn't anti-Israeli by any stretch of the imagination they have voted against them in the UN every single time for decades and they only officially recognised Israel in the 1980's.
Fact of the matter is the resources in the Middle East are at the middle of a tug of war which China is winning and Israel is costing America a victory it had little chance of having in the first place.
Now Israel is at the center of another US failure. It's not like China doesn't own America already this really doesnt help. - inactive, on 01/28/2009, -3/+35It looks like some of the Arab League client states are getting uncomfortable. USA support and material aid for the Israelis to murder thousands of Arabs are making the oppressed masses in the client states rowdy. Remember, if it were not for USA protection, the Saudi and Egyptian dictatorships wouldn't last an hour. Israeli genocide in Palestine has brought the overdue downfall of those USA-backed tyrannies closer to reality by inciting the rage of the oppressed populations of USA client states.
- Erich100, on 01/28/2009, -0/+29The US needs oil. The main focus of our foreign policy is designed to either secure oil for ourselves or deprive China of oil. I don't see how Israel helps that in any significant way. If anything Israel is an hindrance.
With the US and Israel being joined at the hip and the world view of Israel deteriorating, the oil producing countries are in a position to have more influence than they have had in a long time to force the US to rethink middle eastern policy.
I don't like the idea of any foreign entity having sway in US decision making but, this could be a good thing in view of the absurd devotion the US government has for Israel. - inactive, on 01/28/2009, -0/+25We hope that peace process will progress. If it does not, then we surely are left in a new cold war era that nobody wants.
- inactive, on 01/28/2009, -3/+25Good comments.
The only sensible criterion on which to base our foreign policy is national interest. Notions of saving the world through democratization backfire and create enemies instead. And dumping oil tanker loads of money on one small country to assuage the national conscience for something America didn't do is ridiculous. To do so when our aid is used to steal land from the rightfulvowners and then kill them is unconscionable.
The Arabs are right. It's time for a new Mid East policy and it should follow our interests which lie with Iran and the Arabs. - clvngodess, on 01/28/2009, -2/+20...To do so when our aid is used to steal land from the rightfulvowners and then kill them is unconscionable. ...
But this is how the West was won, my dear. (she says cynically.) - kemp34, on 01/28/2009, -2/+19And "national interest" should not mean crony corporate interest, but the actual interest of defending American lives, American liberty and American sovereignty.
- inactive, on 01/28/2009, -3/+20Israel was a minor strategic asset during the Cold War. Now of course, at best they are an albatross around our neck. At worst, they are a tapeworm.
- Alheithinn, on 01/28/2009, -2/+18This is all well and fine but it does not address the fact or the impact of Obama's interview on Al Arabiya today. The situation of the 23rd no longer obtains and the Arab world may well have revised its opinion after today's interview. It will not be lost on them that this is Obama's first televised interview - and that he extended it to the second largest Islamic network after Al Jazeera. Gestures like this have great meaning in diplomacy. As TheWashingtonNote.com points out, "It doesn't matter which Muslim capital Obama goes to now because he just reached out to the hearts and minds of Muslims in every capital and frankly, Muslims everywhere -- including inside the United States."
"Everyone will have to adjust now. The Saudis will leave the peace deal on the table. The Israelis have to remake themselves -- even if Netanyahu succeeds Olmert. Hamas will have to find a way to become differently postured -- if not on Israel, then at least on some level of international acceptability with American partners. Arab stakeholders are going to have to snap out of positions shaped more by status quo thinking and inertia that things will never change and get with the Obama program."
In point of fact, the title of this article, the call of the Arab leaders for "Dramatic Revision Of U.S. Policy" was answered today. That is exactly what Obama promised. The extent of Obama's break with past US policy is truly astounding and it cannot be downplayed. - X86BSD, on 01/28/2009, -0/+15Warning! Broken record comment about to ensue!
Having said that, if we would simply follow the advice of the founding fathers, and be friends to all via trade, and do not form entangling alliances with anyone none of this would be an issue for us. None of it. It's really that simple. Talk to everyone, trade with them, do not bomb them, do not build bases on their land, do not give them military aid, support or financing for military actions, stop overthrowing their elected governments, stealing their resources, etc. It's really not that hard guys. It's not isolationism! It's minding your own business. If your hand isn't in the cookie jar it can't be cut off. - ajgasper, on 01/28/2009, -1/+15Have to say the comments on this one have been thought provoking.
US Democracy. Over the years I’ve noticed wherever Americans have gone with their democracy, so has its special brand of corruption; Vietnam and the Philippines to be specific. Eventually the peasants get upset and topple those institutions, and the citizens start to live decent lives. It’s not to say corruption wasn’t there to begin with, and it probably wasn’t eliminated totally; but it wasn’t so hideous that it subverted cultural and societal norms. I suppose with the collapse of world economies from US government mismanagement over the past 20 years, one could hypothesize that revolt is close at hand in the US.
I read somewhere that one of the first things the US needs to do to establish effective Foreign Policy, is restore Constitutional rights to its citizens. This wrung a bell with me from the perspective that if we can’t live in a society that gives equal freedom and access to justice to everyone, how can we expect to export “democracy”. What you end up with is making decisions that are narrow in focus and deal with short term issues. You end up propping up degenerate regimes that oppress its citizens to a point the government is overthrown, the US ends up with a fervent enemy, and then the US ends up sucking eggs trying to find other short term solutions (military intervention).
Anyway, some random thoughts that may or may not some basis in reality. - inactive, on 01/28/2009, -4/+16Saudi Arabia can suck my ass. The only reason they're allies is because they are perched upon a rather large amount of that gooey black liquid to which the US is addicted. Otherwise they'd be country non grata to us. Or at least they should be. They sanction institutionalized abuse of women and girls, among other atrocities.
- inactive, on 01/28/2009, -1/+12"Moderate States" laughing my ass off. These are client states, protectorates of the USA, bribed and browbeaten to keep their hands off Israel.
Don't talk to the leaders, talk to the people in those states. The ones imprisoned, executed, tortured by the USA-sponsored state terrorism of their governments. - inactive, on 01/28/2009, -2/+12Al-Aribiya is the mouthpiece of USA client states in the Arab League.
- damack, on 01/28/2009, -1/+11That interview didn't do anything to comfort anybody while Israel are bombing Palestinians with American weapons and Obama is on Arab TV telling people they want peace I doubt people were thinking "wow what sincerity".
The interview was really a joke if you want to show your sincerity take actions most people probably laughed that interrview off before turning to another channel to read about how many people has just been murdered by US backed Israel in Palestine. - writie, on 01/28/2009, -2/+11Caf: It's not entirely a question of one or the other. There are converging interests between Israel and its neighbours, notably a fear of a powerful Iran. It's also in Saudi Arabia's interests, for example, to have a stable Middle East generally, as it has invested massively in Lebanon and (to a far lesser degree) in Palestine. The day there is some stability in the Israeli and Palestinian issue it will also be investing massively in Tel Aviv and in Israeli companies quicker than you can say "Book me a flight".
- AgeofMastery, on 01/28/2009, -2/+11FTA
"He also says the so-called moderate Arab states — led by Egypt and Saudi Arabia — are threatened by the blossoming support among their citizenry for Hezbollah and Hamas, groups that reject the past three decades of slow, stumbling progress toward recognizing Israel's right to exist and trying to negotiate a Palestinian state alongside it."
We can either work with the moderates or the people will keep turning to the extremists. - mrukz, on 01/28/2009, -0/+8Beth,
Come on. Do you think Saudi Arabians love their government? Aren't we a bit responsible for what's going on there? We support all kinds of undemocratic regimes in the region, including the one in Saudi Arabia. Who knows how much more normal the country would be if not for the meddling of foreign powers. Can you honestly say we ever cared about the average Saudis? - writie, on 01/28/2009, -0/+7I understand what you're saying, but a change of those regimes would open a Pandora's box. I don't think it would lead to a period of shining democracy, personally.
- inactive, on 01/28/2009, -2/+9@Alheitinn you might try to educate yourself on this issue. You and Nina and all of the other "faithful" would not look so damn uninformed.
- alappat1, on 01/28/2009, -0/+6Nice article, but I hope people realize that, the only true way for the US to win over the middle east is to completely cut off any dependence on the area's oil , AND get rid of the Israeli backed lobby in Washington. This has to co-inside with a culture change globally where nationalism is trumped by humanism (in the sense that all humans regardless of nationality are considered equal). Without these... there will never be world peace as sides that consider themselves to be more "human" than their counterparts will use political pressure to alter US's stance (assuming US gets over its holier than thou attitude itself).
- bullhead2007, on 01/28/2009, -1/+4We support Israel because the Jews need to be there for Jesus to come back riding on a dinosaur.
- Erich100, on 01/28/2009, -0/+3At this point I would lean towards tape worm.
- inactive, on 01/28/2009, -1/+4It's a pretty good bet those Saudis were thinking of the illegal settlements in the West Bank when they planned it out.
- richmomz, on 01/28/2009, -1/+4Israel was an important ally during the Cold War against a (mostly) pro-Soviet Arab region. Today there's no more Soviet Union and Israel has become more of a liability than an asset - as 9/11 proved our partnership with Israel against Arab interests for so many years has bred a form of extremism that has come back to bite us in the ass. If we're really interested in peace and in our longterm security against terrorism we need to treat BOTH sides equally and fairly.
- inactive, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2LMAO!
- TamerAli, on 01/28/2009, -0/+2US are largely to blame for the mess because the government is elected by US people. This is not the case for Saudis and similar countries.
- inactive, on 01/28/2009, -0/+2I think that we're both in agreement on this issue but approaching it in different directions.
The notion of people of any nation loving their government is a doosey. We haven't loved our government for a long time. And we are largely to blame for the mess we're in by being apathetic and not demanding accountability from the people we "hired" to do our bidding. Hopefully that will begin to change.
I agree, in general this country never cared about the average Saudi. The people in power in Saudi Arabia don't care about the average Saudi.
I guess I'm not seeing where you and I disagree on this issue. - InvisibleInk, on 01/28/2009, -0/+2Exactly, but it will never happen. The entrenched militarism that Eisenhower warned the nation about has ruled our Republocrat leaders' thinking for 60 years now.
Non-intervention was a much better way to conduct international affairs than our current militarism, which demands new enemies to fuel our military industrial complex which so many of our states’ local economies thrive on. Their congressional representatives naturally support militarism because so many of their constituents demand it. Close our base? Forget it. Shutdown that fighter jet manufacturing plant? No, no, no, that's a non-starter!
At the same time we are also inventing new enemies to satisfy our unquenchable thirst for global military hegemony, an opportunity that presented itself in the wake of the cold war ending. Our country has become like a vampire that feeds on the blood of foreigners.
Obama has not, nor will not, offer a real alterative to militarism and foreign interventions. He will try to appease all sides in a futile attempt to repair the reputation of this country. It won't work and there will be new wars as long as their are alliances, foreign aid and weapons sales. - inactive, on 01/28/2009, -2/+3@ajgasper sorry about my bad temper. I know you all are decent people. I just ask that you don't take things on "faith" ... that you lift the hood, kick the tires.
Playing devil's advocate is one thing I do here on digg to a) test whether my own assumptions are correct or false and b) try to get others to do the same.
Cheers. - lostlyrics, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1hm ugh - nope - if I had to choose israel,
then because of betterplace.com and an
electrocar infrastructure in development -
for declaring their independence eventually. - TamerAli, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1It depends on how you change it. If it is by forcing new similar regime, with new faces, then it is not a change. If it is by letting the people rule, what more democracy you want? USA is supporting the regimes in the middle east that are most hated by these regimes citizens. This actually made the USA unwillingly an enemy to these states people.
- mrukz, on 01/29/2009, -0/+1Beth,
TamerAli summarized what I meant.
You say they are our "allies." You make it sound as if two equal entities got together and became allies but this is not the case. You have our country supplying equipment, training, and other means to support a dysfunctional, oppressive monarchy, which, you are right, gives us oil in exchange. We are very, very willing to support that corrupt government for our own benefit because we see their country only as a commodity. Now, what do you expect? You say that they should be a country-non-grata to us because of their "atrocities." I am saying that we are responsible for everything what goes on there because WE put our hands in it. Maybe it would be the same if we didn't but we don't know. We are responsible for what is going on there because we are the only superpower that meddled into this country's affairs. So, we cannot take the high moral ground of making them a country-non-grata unless we apply the same kind of contempt to ourselves. If we do this selectively then what are we? Hypocrites, that's what we are.
BTW, it is good to mention other oppressive regimes we support. For example, before you complain how extremist and unbalanced the Egyptian society is, take a moment to think of our support for their government, which holds the country by force. Then remember Newton's law: To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Yes, we can blame others, but we apply the force that gives us the equal and opposite reaction. - clickmyface, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1saaaaay whaaaaaaaat?
- inactive, on 02/11/2009, -0/+0I would very much like for us to keep our foreign policy to diplomacy in matters that are of concern to Americans, as well as trade that is beneficial to America. What interest do we have in Israel's defense? None. Yet we have taken their side regardless for sixty years. The Muslims around the world, even the majority of the very few that are prone to jihad, would be highly unlikely to hate America if we had minded our own business and bought Arab oil fairly rather than trying to rob Arab countries of their resources.
Perhaps it is time to mend fences with the Arab world through diplomacy and treating them as equals to all other peoples. If we hadn't been bombing, pulling off false flag operations, killing millions in senseless and inexcusable wars for well over half a century, and had simply engaged in mutually beneficial trade we would have no problems in the Middle East. If we're going to sell arms to Israel, something far too much of already, we should sell them to the Arabs as well. No more financial aid for foreign nations either! - Maddoktor2, on 01/29/2009, -1/+1And that justifies it?
- ajgasper, on 01/28/2009, -3/+1@yellowcakewalk, Nina is a real sweetheart, and "all of the other faithful" are thoughtful and open. On the other hand, I don't think I'd want to piss Nina off, or run into her in a dark alley somewhere; but she really is one of the more decent people I’ve talked with. Not to mention she’s a real hoot, and has the sexiest voice over the phone.
- Maddoktor2, on 01/28/2009, -5/+1Saudi Arabians flew planes into the WTC. Have the islamofascist radical left antisemites calling for the destruction of Israel suddenly and conveniently forgotten that? Figures...
The radical right GOP sure ignored it, and left the mess in Iraq for someone else to clean up.
You people need to just go away and give the world a chance to recover from your eternal hatred. - Alheithinn, on 01/28/2009, -10/+4A conspiracy behind every tree, huh? I thought my father was the most cynical and pessimistic man who ever lived. Now I can see that I was wrong.
- bboy1122, on 01/28/2009, -9/+0Its all to make us look like the good guys, if we support Israel they have the power to take over the entire Gaza strip and Palestine and then we would have oil from them and Arab states, but its all to make us not look bad, when you are the most powerful nation on the planet and you dont want to look bad do you choose Arabs or the small Israelis? You choose Israelis because it looks like your helping the little guy, see?
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is