digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

IRAQ: War Launched to Protect Israel - Bush Adviser

ipsnews.net — Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat and actually has been since 1990 -- it's the threat against Israel, ” Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep10, 2002. Zelikow served under Bush 1 and Bush 2 and he is also the executive in charge of the 9-11 commission.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • omegaredIX, on 03/17/2008, -14/+117Add this to the fact that this man headed up the 9-11 commissions report. Project For a New American Century (PNAC) called for the restructuring of the middle east in the US favor. The process of transformation,” the plan said, “is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.” Well the traitors got their new pearl harbor and thousands of our brothers sisters died so they could initiate their plan, and millions more have died since their new pearl harbor. The Bush family crime syndicate had Zelikow run the 9-11 Commissions investigation where he hand picked everything that went into the document. Which means the white house hand picked everything that went into the report. The same white house that promotes the Bush doctrine of Pre-emptive war. We need an independent investigation of 9-11 and the criminals sitting in the white house must be impeached. I wonder if Rice will still be able to work for chevron? Please look up Irving Kristols a Neo-Conservative persuasion and you will know much more about the neo-con plan.
    • chromerium, on 03/17/2008, -6/+6Yep. This guy is credible. Though, I'm not sure even Bush is capable of killing thousands of Americans in cold blood. Oh. Wait. What about all the soldiers he's sent to their deaths in Iraq. Yup, he's totally capable.

      I still think the whole 9/11 conspiracy thing is nuts. There'd be too many people in government who would speak out; it would be a massive conspiracy that they'd never be able to keep the lid on. But one does wonder about the timing of things. A lot of coincidences.

      Will we ever know the truth? Its been 40 years since JFK and we still don't know what happened there. What happened on 9/11? I think it will continue to be a mystery for decades and we'll never know, for sure, what the US governments involvement in that attack was, whether it knew of, or was directly involved in, those attacks.
      • republicker, on 03/17/2008, -3/+8Secret Service in Ruby's strip club drinking, CIA in the sewers, Mafia on the knoll and LBJ just waiting and a lone gun man with a magic bullet who used to work on the secret Japanese base where U2 planes flew from to over spy the USSR, and was a communist defector who spoke flawless Russian and hung out with known CIA agents in rented offices in New Orleans, just happen to shoot the president out of the blue for no reason whatsoever. lol

        I think your the only person in the world that doesnt know what happened to JFK.
        • CoolWind, on 03/17/2008, -5/+4LBJ was well prepared for what happened. He definitely knew in advance.
        • netant, on 03/17/2008, -2/+2And don't forget Mr. Patsy, LHO. How on earth does the US let back in a guy who renounces his American citizenship, and reveals classified information to the Ruskies??? Double/Triple agent, that's who.
      • TimDigg, on 03/17/2008, -5/+13"There'd be too many people in government who would speak out; it would be a massive conspiracy that they'd never be able to keep the lid on."

        The Manhattan project involved 37 installations throughout the country; at least 13 university laboratories; and 100,000 people

        and it was kept SECRET the entire time...btw ever worked for the govt?...pays very well...yes well enough to keep a secret this big
        • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -10/+7The thing with 9/11 is that the millions of unpaid New York and DC residents of all political stripes would have to in on the conspiracy to keep saying they saw planes fly into those buildings.
        • GhostyBoy, on 03/17/2008, -4/+9Tangaroa: Planes did fly into the buildings.

          There is a lot of crazy crap mixed up with the not so crazy crap. This is the process of disinformation. If you talk about anything related to these matters you automatically believe in Reptillians or 'no jetliners' theories or whatever.

          The fact is that tearing the truth out of the official lie and all the conspiracy bunk is quite a task, but not impossible.
          • CoolWind, on 03/17/2008, -3/+7It's possible that the US knew 9/11 was going to happen and intentionally didn't act to prevent it. In that case only a few people would have known about it. In fact, it's clear that Condoleeza chose to ignore US intelligence.
        • TheSwashbuckler, on 03/17/2008, -2/+4ROFLMAO!!!

          The Manhattan Project was NOT kept secret.

          "Soviet spies penetrated the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos and several other locations, sending back to Russia critical information that helped speed the development of the Soviet bomb."

          http://www.cfo.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/espionage.ht ...
        • hadees, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1The Manhattan Project was SOOO secret the Russian knew about it and used information obtained from spies for their own nuclear program.
      • masamunecyrus, on 03/17/2008, -2/+5We don't know exactly what happened with JFK, but 40 years later, we at least know enough to be 100% certain that something illicit occurred.
      • ElAssoWipo, on 03/17/2008, -0/+4"Will we ever know the truth? Its been 40 years since JFK and we still don't know what happened there."

        No we know exactly what happened. An ex marine who had been a filing clerk for the last 12 years in the perfect sniping spot, just went ahead and shot a moving target in the head at 500 yards without a scope.

        And it has nothing to do with the CIA, that's for sure.
    • InetRoadkill, on 03/17/2008, -4/+10The goal was Israel plus establishing a permanent military presence in the center of the world's richest oil region. One thing about Bush -- his motives are transparent. The problem is that no one listened when all this ***** was just starting.
    • spaceman77, on 03/17/2008, -2/+7I don't believe 9/11 is a "massive" conspiracy.
      I too thought it was nuts until I devoted weeks of research to it.
      The official story is incomplete and lacks a lot of details. Any attempt to get the government to fill in the holes in the official story with more information is met with stonewalling behaviour.

      Take a look at the "Clinton Chronicles" on Google video. That was a conspiracy that succeeded in staying secret (err sort of!)
    • RationalXubrnce, on 03/17/2008, -4/+5 You've got it backwards. Zelikow's Zionist buddies control the Bush crime family, not the other way around.
  • americangoy, on 03/17/2008, -24/+65This needs a few thousand DIGGs.
    Basically proves my blog correct.
    • MarkusGarvey, on 03/17/2008, -9/+24you and me both....everyone thought i was nuts when I said this when Bush started this war...WOOHOO!...now lets see what FOX does with it...
      • WaltDismal, on 03/17/2008, -3/+4Following link from sockpuppets is a Rick Roll. Man, I hate 13-year old asshats.
    • sockpuppets, on 03/17/2008, -20/+9Link to americangoy's blog. I hate to say it but yeah, you called it.
      http://tinyurl.com/35udvk
      • MarkusGarvey, on 03/17/2008, -5/+5absolute proof...yer the man AG!...
        • americangoy, on 03/17/2008, -3/+5oohhhhhh you ***** L O L

          the real link is here:

          americangoy.blogspot.com
      • chromerium, on 03/17/2008, -5/+8Don't click that link. It rick rolls you with javascript popups. Ugh.
      • Spottswood, on 03/17/2008, -1/+5god damn it
      • someguy92, on 03/17/2008, -1/+6WTF!?!?
        Dugg for being the most elaborate rick roll ever.
        Had to switch desktops and kill firefox to stop it!
      • GhostyBoy, on 03/17/2008, -2/+1That was the worst rick roll in the history of rickrolls.
      • CryRightardCry, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2Lame.
        Great link from a big ***** loser.
  • macwac, on 03/17/2008, -11/+42It was launched to protect U.S interest in the region (whether that is military, oil, religious, other economic reasons etc.. from Dubai to Kuwait to Israel), to assume Iraq or Iran for that matter being able to shoot a nuke or dirty bomb to U.S is a bit of a fantasy; especially more-so that no country would shoot that missile down before it would hit the states...
    • macwac, on 03/17/2008, -4/+11forgot to mention that it would also make an excellent playground for testing... total control allows you for complete testing of whatever you please with absolutely no immediate objection and no external control or oversight. Iraq was a perfect lab rat.
    • solid12345, on 03/17/2008, -2/+5It was fought for every reason

      1. to protect the security of the oil supplies in the region
      2. to defend israel
      3. to change the culture of the arab world
      4. to promote democracy

      Funny how people have this view wars should be fought for one reason and one reason only. How many people forget WW2 started out as a war of territory but only after we found out about the death camps can we say it was a war to save our free civilization as we know it?

      WMD or not, in the long-term, it is better for the region with Saddam gone even if there is a few years of civil strife. Perhaps one day Baghdad can be the next Dubai where Iraqi teenagers are playing computer games instead of firing AK-47's.
      • auzziedigger, on 03/17/2008, -0/+3I liked your comment up until the last couple of lines. They wern't firing AK-47's until they got a regime change. It's not the business of the US to police the world; people have to choose democracy for themselves if they want it.
      • caleb4mj, on 03/17/2008, -0/+0That would be nice, but we have no guarantee of that and is the price we pay worth it? To us? To them? Could it have been done another way?

        So let me get this straight, our benevolent capitalists are using terror to fight terror, because they are so certain of their moral superiority? It doesn't matter how superior you are, if you commit acts of terror you are a terrorist.
  • cageybee, on 03/17/2008, -37/+53no, the war wasn't launched to protect Israel.

    iraq war emerged, not because of oil, but because of a threat to america's economy - the threat: the "enemy" does not want oil to be traded in us dollars.

    Saddam asked for Euros in 2000 - got removed. Ahmadinejad asking for Euros - being threatened with removal.

    Since Iran now has a major influence on Iraq, US can not leave Iraq, because the moment we leave, Iraq will switch trading their oil from USD to EUR.

    If Iraq switches, then the rest of the OPEC and Russia will switch too.

    If oil is not traded in US dollars, then dollar is no longer a world currency. If dollar is no longer a world currency, then we can't buy anything with dollars. If we can't buy anything with dollars - we die from hunger, because we do not produce anything and it would take years until we start producing.
    • Sil369, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2Sooo basically end of the world? T_T
    • Vowieotw, on 03/17/2008, -2/+21I think the war was started for a multitude of reasons, oil being just one of them
      • GhostyBoy, on 03/17/2008, -1/+7I'll tell you what definitely wasn't the reason: Bringing freedom and democracy.
        • Vowieotw, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2The US only wants "Democracy" in countries in which it is advantageous to do so. Otherwise, they are pretty content with a dictator.
    • Picaroon, on 03/17/2008, -0/+5Kuwait has been taking pounds sterling for years.
    • forgiste, on 03/17/2008, -0/+3What if they go ahead and create the "Amero" and unify it with the Euro, weren't they going to anyway?
    • redxninja, on 03/17/2008, -3/+8"iraq war emerged, not because of oil, but because of a threat to america's economy"
      .....oh the irony.
    • Spottswood, on 03/17/2008, -1/+7No OPEC wont switch because of Saudi Arabia. The neocons are good friends with the Saudis.
    • MacintoshMan, on 03/17/2008, -0/+9"If dollar is no longer a world currency, then we can't buy anything with dollars." It doesnt render that USD useless, it would mean that it would just take more money to buy somthing. Which would mean less money spent on other nations, we would have to come home and start building more stuff hear. And we would be more self sufficient.
      • cageybee, on 03/17/2008, -8/+2if no one wants our currency, how the ***** you gonna buy something??? if we are not producing anything, how the ***** are we going to trade???
        • KennMac, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2You have a very poor understanding of foreign trade to be theorizing. Just because the standard currency for a commodity changes does not mean that currency is no longer accepted as payment.
      • ApostropheMan, on 03/18/2008, -0/+0What are the chances of US industry not being able to pick up the slack given all the closures and the credit squeeze?
    • pintomp3, on 03/17/2008, -4/+7there are many reasons we went to war with iraq, israeli interests being one of them. the israel lobby pushed heavily for the war:
      http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
      the war profiteers were just happy to oblige. it's the same reason they are pushing for war against iran.
      • RationalXubrnce, on 03/17/2008, -5/+2 The Jewish media machine was pretty gung ho behind it also.
    • solid12345, on 03/17/2008, -3/+2Saddam didn't ask for *****. Have all you tinfoil loons forgot Iraq was under sanctions and was trading oil for food? They were not getting dollars or euros for oil!
    • enantiodromia, on 03/17/2008, -3/+5you have got to be kidding! die from hunger, because we "don't produce anything" ?!

      we pay our farmers NOT to farm because we make too MUCH food. how much food do you think we really NEED to import? i'm not talking fancy uber-boutique items, or chinese dog food, but really what can't we make enough of food wise?


      grain? meat? fruits? veggies? dairy? nuts?

      ur insane.
      • quisph, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3Good luck continuing to produce food when you can no longer afford oil.
    • Schul983, on 03/17/2008, -4/+6uhmm... easy there. First off, every other country in the world owns our debt so if we go down, there comin with us. Economics my friend! Globalization has occurred and not matter what, we are all in this together. I'm not puttin on the tin-foil hat quite yet.
  • WaltDismal, on 03/17/2008, -12/+25You're all right. Iraq came to be in the service of a number of interests that all aligned. Oil and its handmaid Cheney wanted us in Iraq and pursuing control of the region. It never intended to leave, that's why we built the massive Green Zone fortress. Israel driving the NeoCons wanted another threat to its dominance eliminated, and what better way than to at the least allow 9/11 and at the very worst, assist it. Silverstein collected massive insurance on his buildings, he wanted it. The military-industrial complex makes obscene amounts of money in war, and they wanted it. Banking was threatened by regional moves towards non-dollar-denominated oil trading, that could not be allowed. Hussein knew too much, he could not be allowed. The boys behind the NAU and the coming NWO wanted a way to weaken the US, which had been growing too big for its britches in empire-building. Many parties wanted this, which is why it's been so obscenely successful. And will continue to be, given our sham election and controlled voting systems.
  • Ell3, on 03/17/2008, -53/+13There were numerous reasons, and Israel wasn't one of them.

    1) Iraq was considered the military epicenter of the Middle East. The Middle East is the home of the Wahhabi Islam, the primary religious movement behind extremist Islam. The 9/11 hijackers were Wahhabist Muslims. So if you want to send a loud clear message to terrorists, you squash it's military epicenter.

    2) The Clinton administration and the UN had both called for "regime change' in Iraq. Iraq had ignored UN mandates.

    3) Removing Saddam would allow the US to introduce "freedom" to the Middle East.

    4) Iraq has some of the largest untapped oil reserves on the planet.

    So America makes the terrorist bastards pay for 9/11 and in return American oil companies get access to Iraq's oil fields and a big fat military base in the center of the Middle east. As a bonus for the Iraqi people, they will all share in the oil wealth, instead of just a few family members.

    That's called a win-win scenario.
    • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -4/+25The epicenter of Wahabbi Islam was (and still is) Saudi Arabia. Iraq was officially secular, although Saddam started finding religion after 1991 as a way of discouraging the growing religious right from overthrowing him.
    • shortysmyname, on 03/17/2008, -4/+19"win-win scenario" ?

      I wouldn't exactly call this war a win-win for anybody.
    • Alix7, on 03/17/2008, -4/+14" So America makes the terrorist bastards pay for 9/11 and in return American oil companies get access to Iraq's oil fields and a big fat military base in the center of the Middle east. As a bonus for the Iraqi people, they will all share in the oil wealth, instead of just a few family members. "

      Rofl
    • wildbillhick, on 03/17/2008, -5/+5Oh if you had the brains to match your beauty!
      • GhostyBoy, on 03/17/2008, -2/+6Beauty is skin deep but ugly goes all the way to the bone.
      • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -3/+5She is a wretched evil bitch and ugly as the most damming sin imaginable.
        • wildbillhick, on 03/17/2008, -4/+1did you look at her picture? i would become a republican just to sit next to her on the bus.
          • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -3/+3Come to Cali or NYC if you want to see beauty, and most are human beings, not repubots. Argentina, Brazil, and Paris have super hot girls, that one is at most 5 feet tall and has a large ass.
          • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2Wow! you'd sell your soul to sit next to a piece of ass that will be short and bloated by 40? You're cheapening yourself in my opinion.
    • lead2thehead, on 03/17/2008, -11/+2Let's not forget the WMDs that the UN found in 1991 which mysteriously disappeared... and all of the cease-fire resolutions that Saddam was in violation of... and then there was that Al Qaida training camp in northern Iraq.
      • buhbyebot, on 03/17/2008, -1/+6He lied about having WMDs to keep Iran at bay you twit. I guess it was a good bluff as it fooled most, even though we had evidence he didn't have them but ignored it.
      • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2Go buy yourself an easter basket... made in china!
      • TheSwashbuckler, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2"and then there was that Al Qaida training camp in northern Iraq."

        Then one in the area controlled by the Kurds? The one the U.S. decided to not take out prior to the war because then it would lessen the reasons to go to war? That training camp?
    • deformation, on 03/17/2008, -1/+73) Removing Saddam would allow the US to introduce "freedom" to the Middle East.
      Freedom? yah right, YOU and anyone who really thinks Iraq was invaded to bring "freedom" to its people is an ASS. a stupid ass with no brain cells or conscience whatsoever.
    • buhbyebot, on 03/17/2008, -2/+7
      1) No link to anyone in Iraq. Afghanistan (YES) Iraq (NO)

      2) So, they ignored the mandates... let's invade! Idiot.

      3) You put "FREEDOM" in quotes. Haha, funny *****. Free from what? Breathing?

      4) OIL? Interesting comment coming from a NewCon.

      So America makes the - innocent people - pay for 9/11 and in return American oil companies get access to Iraq's oil fields and a big fat military base in the center of the Middle east. As a bonus for the Iraqi people, they will all share in the oil - Death - , instead of just a few family members.

      That's called a win-win scenario. You are on crack bitch. Stop being such a ***** idiot while you're still young.
      Cost of the Iraq War in lives lost:
      http://www.infoshout.com/

      Money Spent: 3 Trillion Dollars (3,000,000,000,000.00)*
      *Doesn't include interest

      I replaced a few words in your closing statement to make it accurate and much more intelligent.
    • Sinns, on 03/17/2008, -0/+5How do the Iraqi people benefit from the American oil companies getting access to Iraq's oil fields?

      Put down your Jesus pipe and listen to reason for a change.
  • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -24/+21Neo-zionism is on par with hammas. Israel should be happy they exist as a state at all.... courtesy of GB and USA. bush I put Saddam in that position to being with. rummy was the tool and there is photo proof but neo-cons cannot accept that FACT.

    No more settlements! The settlers are terrorist.
    • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -8/+10> Neo-zionism is on par with hammas.

      Neo-Zionism? First I've heard of it. The old fashioned Zionism is fine by me.
      http://www.mideastweb.org/zionism.htm

      I think I've found what you're talking about, though. This seems to be about encouraging Jewish immigration to Israel, which is all right as long as they respect the rights of the people already living there. The sub-goal of rebuilding the temple is not because there is already a very important one standing there, and the religious nuttiness is a turn-off.
      http://www.kumah.org/neozionism.html

      Now here is the charter of Hamas, with the notable quote "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious". The two agendas are hardly "on par" with each other.
      http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm

      >Israel should be happy they exist as a state at all.

      I suspect that they are happy they exist given the number of times their enemies have tried to destroy them (some of which were attempts at actual genocide, not the "I don't like this so I'll call it GENOCIDE in allcaps" that is popular around these parts). I also see no reason why Israel shouldn't complain whenever it is attacked and defend its interests like any other state.

      > .... courtesy of GB and USA

      Actually, Israel exists courtesy of the massive superpower might of Czechoslovakia. George Bush and the USA don't come into the picture for a long time, unless you are cheering the idea of Saddam slipping a nuke into Israel that Zelikow mentioned as one possible reason Iraq was a threat to peace in its region.

      > bush I put Saddam in that position to being with. rummy was the
      > tool and there is photo proof but neo-cons cannot accept that FACT.

      Sorry, but I have no idea what you are getting at here.

      > No more settlements! The settlers are terrorist.

      Some settlers are terrorists, most aren't. Terrorists, on the other hand, are terrorists.

      Now, do you oppose the growth of Arab settlements in Israel's West Bank region? Let's see some logical consistency here.
      • source1984, on 03/17/2008, -4/+2have you seen the Israeli settlers?? they walk around with freakin guns and shoot at anyone who comes near their illegal houses. They're building illegally!! I don't get how the word "illegal" has no meaning to Zionists.
      • bishopia, on 03/31/2008, -0/+0Do you really think that West Bank is Israel's? If I'm not mistaken, and I'm not, this regions is OCCUPIED TERRITORY. Israel plainly ignores international law when they continue to build settlements on this land and when they encourage Israeli citizens to move into the settlements.
  • NeptuneBkc, on 03/17/2008, -24/+21***** Zionist Israel. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB9APCDswUQ
  • kingofinternet, on 03/17/2008, -24/+4DER JUDEN KRIEG FÜHREN!!!!
  • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -21/+21The USA should stop all payments to the terrorist who support zionist settling. Not all Israelis are zionist, and I'm happy there is the state of Israel, but these settlements have to be stopped as well as the mentality that allows and supports them.
    • salomejones, on 03/17/2008, -10/+4Mentality like the divine right of europeans to slaughter everything that stood between them and the riches of north and south americas?

      Back to your wii, history-boy.
      • supermanred, on 03/17/2008, -5/+5This is 2008, had this been the 1800s or even the early 1900s you would've had a point, unfortunately the rest of the world has evolved past the whole "enter a country, slaughter the natives and pretend its your country" state of being, well of course except for the Israeli Zionist Jews who were one of the last to do this in 1960s. Of course, there is of course China and Tibet but at least China let them stay in their homes for the most part, the Jews just kicked all the pastenians out and bombed the ***** out of them using American weapons.

        Back to your ancient history, Appologist Zionist.
        • salomejones, on 03/17/2008, -3/+3You do realize that the sephardic people (the people you are incorrectly calling "zionist") have been doing that to that whom you are incorrectly calling "palestinians", and these misnamed "palestinians" to them for quite a lot longer than there has even been a united states, I'll just assume.
        • ShadowMerchant, on 03/17/2008, -4/+1Yes, and too bad they didn't kill all the Palestinian cockroaches.
      • salomejones, on 03/17/2008, -4/+3And its so nice to see Digg a nice, sunny basket of neo-nazi propeganda and hate. Enjoy it while you can, because the very millisecond the Microsoft buyout is done, that kind of thing will come to a dead halt.
        Yes, I'm saying that Kevin Rose continually demonstrates that he cares not at all about the rampant anti-semitism and racism on Digg, and would much rather pound a brew than take some responsibility for the bad stuff, as well as the good.
      • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4Before 1913 the whole region was controlled by the Turks... for a couple of hundred years. The mentality of that region can thank its autonomy the the Europeans and Americans who freed them. The only reason there is an Israel or or Syria or Iraq or Iran is because they were FREED from turkish control. None of them had much more than bows and arrows and knives to fight with before the Europeans and AMERICANS armed them to protect themselves, not so they could expand. They were a horseback nation.

        When you can pull yourself away from your amusements, try picking up a book. And I know all about European history and their expansionism, and like the comment above, it was part of that age. And just so you know, amuse means "not think" in it's original greek, "a" used a negator, "muse" means to think or inspire.

        I love the Jewish religion, and believe there is a lot historically that has global significance, but their divine right mentality in the 21st century in counter productive and destructive. And the Neo-Zionist policy of expansion is an excellent example of a cultures arrested development. I hate that innocent children, Arab, Jew, Christian, all HUMAN BEINGS are killed for stupid ideas about national rights or religious conviction. The problem is the fanatics on all sides have robbed otherwise kind human beings of the right to be alive and experience some of the kindness and decency still left in this world.

        There isn't anything you can do about European deeds done 300 years ago but learn from them. But get out your history book and educate yourself beyond your wikipedia mentality and tell me about the boarders of the middle east and please point out where Israel is on the map... then come back and tell me who was your master then. You're been given more than an inch, but citizens of the planet are going to just let you fanatic blow each other off the face of the earth because that is the only thing that it seems is going to satisfy any of you.

  • roadtripguy, on 03/17/2008, -16/+42"Since 1973, Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion. If divided by today's population, that is more than $5,700 per person."
    http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.htm
    What are we gaining from Israel that warrants that much foreign aid? How many people do you know that have actually asked that question? Ask your representative or senator this question.
    • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -3/+9It started out as a bribe for peace (Egypt gets money too) but these days the money goes straight back to the US arms industry. It's basically a bailout to keep American military tech companies alive because Russia and China outcompete them on price on the world market.
    • salomejones, on 03/17/2008, -5/+8What we are getting is military ground and air rights, as well as an ally in what is probably the most usefully strategic smudge on the map.
      • Ogopogo, on 03/17/2008, -3/+4Johnathan Pollard cancels a lot of that 'advantage'. The Israeli's are notorious for reselling US military secrets to China. Not much of an ally. Just ask the survivors of the USS Liberty.
      • bishopia, on 03/31/2008, -0/+0what you should research, salomejones, is that Israel, on many occasions, has refused the US the military ground and air rights you speak of.
    • chi1thook, on 03/17/2008, -4/+3United States has given 100 billion in aid most of which were private donations and the major money is in the government-military complexes in Germany, South Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia ect. This propaganda has gone too far and society needs to hold these left-wing intellectuals accountable for their lies and misinformation. There are things to legitimate criticized Israel about about this bogus stuff needs to stop.
      • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3like taxpayers $$$$$ from the USA.
    • bishopia, on 03/31/2008, -0/+0also consider that Israel is one of the wealthiest and most prosperous countries in the world, with THE strongest military in the region. We should be spending our tax dollars on people that are dying by the millions every year in different countries.
  • swrostmore, on 03/17/2008, -18/+22Protect Israel from WHAT? Saddam's magical invisible WMD's?
    • Trublmakr, on 03/17/2008, -7/+9SCUDs - remember?
      • zolthar, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3Became irrelevant before this war.
        Think of another excuse please.
        • Trublmakr, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Don't look to me to make excuses for American military blunders. If SCUD's were irrelevant and there were no WMD's then there's really nothing left of the initial justification.
    • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -5/+9That's a good reason not to take the fanaticism here seriously.
    • lead2thehead, on 03/17/2008, -6/+2You mean the magical invisible weapons that the UN found and inventoried back in 1991? As in... the weapons that the UN ordered Saddam to destroy in resolution 687? The same weapons that mysteriously disappeared after Saddam kicked the UN weapons inspectors out of Iraq?
      • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2you better stick to hunting easter eggs. They're empirical.
    • zolthar, on 03/17/2008, -3/+0The same people people who shout "Saddam had no WMD's" are the same bigots who dugg you down.
  • wefarrell, on 03/17/2008, -15/+6This is true but its not news. Hardcore neocons have been saying this from the beginning, nothing new has been discovered.
  • chi1thook, on 03/17/2008, -21/+19propaganda
    • ramow, on 03/17/2008, -6/+5go educate yourself!!!!!! gosh how many people are ignorant and wants to stay so.
    • deformation, on 03/17/2008, -3/+6Propaganda? Israel would not survive without the american support and continuous get-rid-of-all-anti-isreal-powers in the middle east. (Iraq, Iran, Syria, Hizbollah, Hammas..etc)
  • UberC, on 03/17/2008, -27/+15Oh please, Israel could have defeated Iraq better than the US is doing right now. They didn't need anyone to try and do it for them
    • altrbl, on 06/03/2008, -8/+10That is because of all the weapons, money, help, support, F15s/F16s we give them for free while they spy on us.
      • RonnyN, on 03/17/2008, -8/+8I wouldn't expect someone named "Ziad" to say anything in favor of Israel...
    • supermanred, on 03/17/2008, -8/+9LOL yeah the Israelis and their trillions of dollars worth of AMERICAN EQUIPMENT the most part of which was donated or subsidized heavily.

      Give me a break.
    • source1984, on 03/17/2008, -1/+5even with American aid, the Israeli army is not big enough to leave its own country and attack Iraq. They might be able to have defeated saddam with airpower.. but eventually they would have to occupy iraq
    • chi1thook, on 03/17/2008, -1/+6There was never trillions of dollars of american equipment given to israel and those F-15's and F-16's are stripped of internal american components on the moment of delivery and the only thing american about those F-15's and F-16's are the airframe.
      • RonnyN, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2True. I actually did this kinda stuff!
    • deformation, on 03/17/2008, -3/+3yah right, like how they defeated Hizbollah in Lebanon in 2006 summer?
    • zolthar, on 03/17/2008, -0/+0Suppose it can.
      Why bother?
      Saddam became rather irrelevant in comparison to other threats.
      If Israel had the US working under it's command, it would use it against other targets.
  • 0biKwiet, on 03/17/2008, -6/+10I would actually feel better if this were the case; at least we would have accomplished some kind of goal. Unfortunately it's about as much of a rationalization as the whole WMD deal. How did Iraq pose any greater threat to Israel than any other Arab country, and why would Israel have had any problem dealing with them?
  • cheezintern, on 03/17/2008, -11/+14Great article...all you gotta do is follow the money..
  • altrbl, on 06/03/2008, -7/+6I think it is about time that we stop looking out for others interests and stop putting our men and women in harms way for others benefit while getting nothing in return....
  • Alix7, on 03/17/2008, -6/+17Protect Israel from an attack based on some skewed and mis-translated speech from Ahmadinejad?

    How about the millions in Darfur being raped, murdered and butchered??
    • RRJackson, on 03/17/2008, -1/+6There's no tactical advantage to occupying Darfur. Besides, what's going on there is largely because the Chinese want their oil and we don't want to ***** with the Chinese because they'll erase us from the face of the Earth if we piss them off.
      • caleb4mj, on 03/17/2008, -0/+0In that case China needs to clean up Darfur.
  • dserfaty, on 03/17/2008, -19/+15Well it was just a matter of time... when you can't find an excuse anymore, blame the Jews. It always works.
    /sarcasm
    • antechinus, on 03/17/2008, -2/+3Even if you can't blame them for everything, wouldn't it be better for the rest of the world if the ME was transformed into an obsidian themepark.
    • Ogopogo, on 03/17/2008, -2/+1So why was Sandy Berger stealing classified documents from the National Archives?
    • GhostyBoy, on 03/17/2008, -2/+6Yes, because blaming Israel is the same as blaming the Jews.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy
    • 4UIDigg, on 03/17/2008, -4/+2you'd think there would be some limits, but someone above left a link to the Mossad - JFK assassination theory, and then got digged up for it
  • czeman, on 03/17/2008, -7/+6Wouldn't you know it? More "I think" and "I believe" statements taken as fact.
  • bgovern, on 03/17/2008, -19/+13I like stories like this, now we can see exactly who the anti-semitic libtards are without having to guess.
    • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -10/+4Not all of them are liberals. There is a sizeable right-wing anti-semitic contingent on Digg and there are a number of users whose political leanings I have not been able to deduce other than that they hate the Jews. It's one thing the commies and the nazis can agree on.
      • RRJackson, on 03/17/2008, -4/+6Actually, the "commies" were frequently Jewish and that's a big part of why the Nazis wanted to eradicate them. Hitler sold his whole concept of what became WWII as a necessary action to wipe out the Soviet Union before communism could overrun Europe.
        • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -5/+4Right, but here 70 years later there's a groundswell of anti-semitism coming from the far left through Communist groups like the Workers' World Party (ANSWER) in the US. They see the stateless Arabs as the oppressed proletariat and Israel as the capitalist oppressor, so they ingested the whole of the anti-semitic propaganda framework that the PLO created to turn kids into terrorists and they treat it all as gospel. What's hilarious is that these Communist groups are now, more and more often, repeating actual Nazi propaganda and welcoming white supremacists from vdare and stormfront as allies in supporting the "Palestinian Cause" (killing the Jews).
    • pintomp3, on 03/17/2008, -8/+10not wanting american soldiers to die for israel's interests is anti-semitic? i suppose not wanting to give billions of US tax payer dollars to israel is anti-semitic too.
      • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -6/+5Right on! Anytime you criticize Israeli policy you're labeled anti-semitic. We should cut them off from our tax payer's life line then lets see who's anti semitic. They are the most ungrateful wretches. Give it all back to the turks and then we'll hear another tone.
    • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -4/+2A child's argument.
  • morningmatters, on 03/17/2008, -5/+12Protecting Israel may have something to do with this as many of the Neocon leadership have dual US/Israel citizenships. However this maybe only one of the moral pretexts for this war. IMO the chief reason for this war still have to do with the economic prospects which specific US companies such as Haliburton could gain from the reconstruction of Iraq afterwards.
  • Stryder81, on 03/17/2008, -8/+4Wait.....What Is That I hear? Huh?......Ohhhhhh " NO ***** SHERLOCK! "
  • xt0xicx, on 03/17/2008, -4/+2Bush has Advisers?
    • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -3/+3Yeah, but he's got an ego so he makes sure none of them are as smart as he is.
    • source1984, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3yea, his advisors are psychos bent on global domination. looks like they werent smart enough to see iraq coming!!
  • wildbillhick, on 03/17/2008, -6/+3first astro turf, now iraq.
  • stirlo, on 03/17/2008, -4/+5if you want to say they did it "for" anyone, you have to include the Saudis too, Saddam used to threaten both countries fairly regularly
  • cidman2001, on 03/17/2008, -3/+7The answer is D) All of the Above....The whole war was based on all of the reasons (and probably more) that people have discussed, but you 911 conspiracy theorists are all nuts. Shouldn't you be looking for Bigfoot or something?
    • dselliott, on 03/17/2008, -3/+5Adherents to the ludicrous official 911storyline are the nuttiest of all.
    • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3Maybe you should go shopping right now and get some easter bunny stuff to shove down your kids throats. Or some santa crap. or some green beer. What ever it takes to keep your little world together while the big boys read between the lines.
    • GhostyBoy, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3Not as nuts as you might think:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73qK4j32iuo
  • LoJack, on 03/17/2008, -9/+3Who cares why? We now have a military base that produces oil. So what's the problem?
    • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1addicted to oil is the problem. The results of this war will help us kick that one way or another. The US is being robbed blind and it will continue robbing us blind until we wake up to the fact that the same people we are helping us in the morning are screwing us at night.
    • LoJack, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1If you can't tell sarcasm, you shouldn't be Digging.
  • synaesthesia, on 03/17/2008, -4/+5Bush and US officials spoke to Ariel Sharon and Mossad and the message they got was "Save your time with Iraq, they aren't a threat. If you want a fight, worry about Iran". Sounds like advice that we would have been wise to follow.
  • JerkHimey56, on 03/17/2008, -6/+0This is news? Zelikow is a great man for so many reasons.
  • pintomp3, on 03/17/2008, -4/+15how long until this is marked as inaccurate by the megaphone crew?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaphone_desktop_too ...
    • morningmatters, on 03/17/2008, -0/+3Yikes. This sounds like a kick ass propaganda tool.
    • viewlakes, on 03/18/2008, -0/+0My Sentiments Exactly. So the Zionistas control the Blogosphere AND Corporate Media. DIGG - Do not allow this kind of Manipulation of the Facts. My comment reads" Why is it when one tries to apply the Litmus test to foreign policy, it does not apply to Israel. Americans at some point have to realize that their pro Israeli Bias goes against all International Law, and Human Rights. People with differing viewpoints should not be allowed to Bury stories like this by merely saying, "oh that's inaccurate". We need to be an True Honest broker. Shame on AIPAC and the Neo-Cons"
  • aserer511, on 03/17/2008, -3/+8I am hoping to GOD this is false, in the name of the reputation of american foreign policy for AGES to come
    • GhostyBoy, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4"the reputation of american foreign policy"

      I'm just going to level with you here: The U.S. had a poor international reputation *before* 9/11. I can't think of a word to describe that reputation now.
  • RRJackson, on 03/17/2008, -9/+3And the problem with this is? There are all kinds of good reasons for us to be there. Protecting Israel is one of them. There's also the way we were able to close our base in Saudi Arabia and get our forces away from Mecca once we owned Iraq (remember how angry having troops near Mecca made the fundies? It's why they said they staged 9/11). We also don't have to beg Syria or Turkey for the use of their airspace to get planes into the Persian Gulf region from Europe anymore. We're also able to keep closer tabs on Russia. There are a LOT of great reasons to be in Iraq. Yes, the president lied to everyone to get us there. Read a few of the comments here and you'll have an idea why he couldn't just level with us. Still, did anyone actually think he was just too dumb to know what seemed obvious to you? "How can he think Iraq is a threat to the United States!?!?! Does he really think Saddam helped plan 9/11!?!?! He's a moron!" Uh, no.
    • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -2/+1Any way you wrap it, it's not going to have the results that put the US at any advantage in the long run. You are simply using a Machiavellian argument, "the ends justify the means," which is.... wrong.
      • RRJackson, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2I dunno. That piece of land is tactical gold. You looked at it on a map lately?
  • pyrotix, on 03/17/2008, -3/+7More disinformation coming from where else - the Bush administration.
  • 1ski, on 03/17/2008, -9/+8 this is pure *****. zelikow denied ever making that statement in the london review of books in 2006.

    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n10/letters.html
    • Idiggapony, on 03/17/2008, -3/+7Can the people digging down this comment please explain why they're doing so?
      • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -3/+7Because it gets in the way of their irrational hatred of Israel.
        • Idiggapony, on 03/17/2008, -1/+6Oh yeah, good point. Never mind, carry on everyone.
        • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -3/+1We don't hate Israeli people or the religion, just the mentality of supremacy and arrogance of the illegal settlers that keeps the region from finding some peace. We wanted you to be a state, we wanted you to have autonomy, but where is the limit? I't not a black and white issue of loving or hating a nation or the PEOPLE who live there in a blanket statement. But every time someone criticizes the policy of the Israeli government Jews change the subject and start yelling "anti-semites, anti-semites" as if you don't want to engage in a peaceful solution but continuing doing what you're doing by divine right. There's no winning with Jews on this point. I love the ideas in the religion, and my Jewish friends are certainly some of my best and closest, and they agree with halting the settlements in order to create a peace in the region. I can see both sides of the argument when you all are both blowing up each others children, you're both a violent race it seems?
    • source1984, on 03/17/2008, -5/+3he can deny it all he wants. people involved in this type of thing are usually liars. neocons have a passion for israel -- theres no surprise here. this article is beign dugg up because its no breakthrough. its common knowledge iraq was done for many reasons -- one of the main ones was Israeli pressure.
  • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -4/+7Before 1913 the whole region was controlled by the Turks... for a couple of hundred years. The mentality of that region can thank its autonomy the the Europeans and Americans who freed them. The only reason there is an Israel or or Syria or Iraq or Iran is because they were FREED from turkish control. None of them had much more than bows and arrows and knives to fight with before the Europeans and AMERICANS armed them to protect themselves, not so they could expand. They were a horseback nation.

    When you can pull yourself away from your amusements, try picking up a book. And I know all about European history and their expansionism, and like the comment above, it was part of that age. And just so you know, amuse means "not think" in it's original greek, "a" used a negator, "muse" means to think or inspire.

    I love the Jewish religion, and believe there is a lot historically that has global significance, but their divine right mentality in the 21st century in counter productive and destructive. And the Neo-Zionist policy of expansion is an excellent example of a cultures arrested development. I hate that innocent children, Arab, Jew, Christian, all HUMAN BEINGS are killed for stupid ideas about national rights or religious conviction. The problem is the fanatics on all sides have robbed otherwise kind human beings of the right to be alive and experience some of the kindness and decency still left in this world.

    There isn't anything you can do about European deeds done 300 years ago but learn from them. But get out your history book and educate yourself beyond your wikipedia mentality and tell me about the boarders of the middle east and please point out where Israel is on the map... then come back and tell me who was your master then. You're been given more than an inch, but citizens of the planet are going to just let you fanatic blow each other off the face of the earth because that is the only thing that it seems is going to satisfy any of you.
  • Idiggapony, on 03/17/2008, -12/+6I was just thinking we were about due for another anti-Israel pile-on. The Israel haters who comprise such a major contingency on digg.com have been uncharacteristically quiet for a while, so I guess it was time to trot out an old speech from 2002 and get worked into a second frenzy about it.

    This particular version of the "Jews are responsible for all wars and all other bad things on the planet" argument is not one of the stronger ones. For one thing, Zelikow himself has confirmed that he did not mean that the United States invaded Iraq in order to protect Israel, only that Iraqi attacks would pose a bigger threat to Israel than to the United States. He has also said that he did not personally advise the president on whether the Iraq issue should be dealt with using diplomacy or military force, and that he could not speculate about the president's motives, because he was not privy to discussions with the president about whether or not to go to war.

    If I were an Israeli, the last thing I would have wanted in 2003 would be for the U.S. to invade Iraq. Saddam Hussein did try to stir up popular support in the Arab world by making token payments to the families of Palestinian terrorists, but these were negligible compared to the money that the terrorists were pulling in from a number of other countries. Notably from Iran, a country that has been advertising its desire to annihilate Israel for years now, and that continues to move closer and closer to the capability of building nuclear weapons. Now that U.S. military forces are bogged down in Iraq, they're not available to participate in any potential operation against Iran, a country that really does threaten Israel's existence. The Iraq war certainly isn't making Israel any safer.
    • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -2/+2"If I were an Israeli, the last thing I would have wanted in 2003 would be for the U.S. to invade Iraq." -- given that the last time the US was poised to attack Iraq, Iraq launched a bunch of missiles into Israeli cities. I wonder how many people here remember that. If Israel had retaliated then every Arab state in the Desert Shield alliance would have quit or switched sides.
      • Idiggapony, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3I think we were talking about 2003. How many of those Iraqi Scuds were intact in 2003? And by comparison, how many missiles capable of striking Israel did Iran have in 2003?
        • Tangaroa, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3Right. If Iraq didn't have anything that threatened Israel, then the rationale for Israel to promote the invasion goes away and it makes little sense to think Israel was behind the invasion. However, if Iraq did have anything that threatened Israel (or if Israel thought they did) then Israel would remember what happened the last time the US went up against Iraq and would want to prevent that from happening again, so it still makes little sense to think Israel was behind the invasion.
    • shabumike, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2UN resolution 242, look it up.
  • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -6/+2The wiki reference wasn't directed toward pintomp3, I'm a big fan of his correctness and keen insight. Friend me! I'd like to hear more about what's happening in your neck of the woods. He's the real deal, a soldier.
  • haribez, on 03/17/2008, -16/+2You guys don't know anything about politics. ISRAEL IS OUR FRIEND!!! SADDAM IS DEAD NOW, THE WORLD IS A MUCH BETTER PLACE. STOP SUPPORTING RADICAL 'LEFT WING' AGENDA. FOOLS!
    • cheekybastard, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3Put down the caps lock key now, caps are the most deadly weapon on the internet.

      And they hurt my eyes.
    • shabumike, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Please find some critical thought processes before spouting about that which you have no idea.
    • viewlakes, on 03/18/2008, -0/+0"Since 1973, Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion. If divided by today's population, that is more than $5,700 per person."
      http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.htm
      What are we gaining from Israel that warrants that much foreign aid? How many people do you know that have actually asked that question? Ask your representative or senator this question.
  • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -7/+2Go buy an easter basket.
  • pell, on 03/17/2008, -4/+6It is about protecting israel and keeping the oil away from it's enemies. After that settles, water will be the next thing to fight over. Stupid ***** planet.
  • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -8/+1Maybe you should write santa a letter.
  • RationalXubrnce, on 03/17/2008, -9/+14 Call them Zionists or Jewish bankers or whatever but one thing is clear, they are the real power in America. They dominate the production of our currency, our media, our schools, everything of importance. "To truly tell where power lies you need only ask who you can't criticize." You can certainly criticize crusty old white men and WASP's so that makes you wonder who is really calling the shots.
    • synaesthete, on 03/18/2008, -0/+0You can't criticize Blacks or Gays either. They therefore must control EVERYTHING.
  • cheekybastard, on 03/17/2008, -2/+13Now that the Soviet Union is no more, why does the US still need to spend money on Israel? They are not our "friends", the real world is not a primary school playground. They got nukes, a well trained and equipped military and a strong economy, leave them to make nice with their neighbors on their own (or not). They created the Palestinian problem, let them sort their own way out. Enough already.
    • caponumen, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1It's all about POWER AND MONEY, always has been.
  • solid12345, on 03/17/2008, -8/+3Oh the Israel haters grasp for straws yet again. If Iraq was no threat to America, it was definitely no threat to Israel.

    A more believable theory is we took down Hussein so we can build up a de facto Kurdish state to counter-balance Iranian and Syrian power in the region.
    • cheekybastard, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4Kurdistan, are you smoking crack? I can name three countries that would make sure that bastardized idea never comes to full term.

      Iran and Syria already had a counter balance in the region, it was Saddam Hussein.

      • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -0/+3Iraq was secular before we invited ourselves in.
  • GhostyBoy, on 03/17/2008, -2/+6Watch 9/11: Press for Truth.

    Zelikow was a key player in white-washing the 911 commission report. The 9/11 families repeatedly and publicly asked Zelikow to step down from this position, and he refused. The 9/11 families have since maintained that the majority of the questions they have regarding 9/11 have never been properly answered.

    This is a speech by the mother of one of the 9/11 victims:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=JtsLZM8Ktx4
  • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -3/+3I honestly can say that hearing from the Zionist has given me great perspective as to why there is so much trouble in the middle east. I have many, many jewish friends, some from Israel, but I have never heard or seen anything like the duplicity and arrogance of those who defend the settlements. They are like nothing to be believed on American soil accept for gangs and gang violence, well white supremacist too, with an air of entitlement that reeks of backward a priori arguments so circular that they resemble dogs chasing their tails. Jews are even more divided among themselves according to my neighbor who was born there as she can't go into some neighborhoods in pants for fear of violence. Where does civilization draw the line? Will we have to annihilate ourselves and obliterate all national lines in order for people to be able to live kindly and peaceable? What will be enough for both Jews and Arabs to shut the ***** up and get on with their lives? America really can't say much either by invading countries that haven't attacked us, but the citizens are in a stronghold by the bush people. Perhaps by our own devises, however I've never voted for any of them, and a lot of us see that the US government presently only seems to accelerating the situation. If killing me would bring you happiness, then I'd gladly walk that line, but you want me and my brother, and my sister, and everyone who lives near me, everyone in my state, my country, my continent... everyone who isn't you and yours to be killed or submit. There will never be enough land to settle this ambition and lust of the middle east until they feel like they control the world. You people carry a chip on your shoulder the size of Jupiter.
  • schneidafunk, on 03/17/2008, -8/+5Oh god, another "the jews are to blame" story, disguised as if we talk about how Israel instead of the jews, it's perfectly OK and P.C.

    Anyone with a decent education of history will recognize that Israel is not the puppet master of America but completely reverse. Israel is a colony of America and the only loyal one in the middle east. If we are protecting Israel, rest assured it's because we're protecting America first and using Israel as a proxy.

    I'm sure the youngsters on digg will not recall, but during the first gulf war, Iraq launched missiles at Israel (which hit) to provoke a retaliation attack. Israel DID NOT attack back because of pressure from America. The strategy was to draw Israel into a war with Iraq which would unite other Arab countries into an all out mideast war. If you read the FTA you'll notice that he doesn't say the main reason we invaded Iraq was to protect Israel... he was just pointing out another reason to justify why we should of invaded Iraq, because the main motive (finding WMDs) was not accomplished.
    • saqer, on 03/17/2008, -3/+2it's a host-parasite relationship...We're the host, Israel's the leech. We have enough of a presence in other parts of the middle east
    • idisagree, on 03/30/2008, -1/+0Its sad to read schneidafunks "pity my people aaagain" diversion. What the Jews don't need is an atmosphere where valid concerns about 'Israel' cannot be uttered without some schmo trying to confusing the issue (and thereby limit public dialogue). We as Jews don't need special treatment althought sadly in the media, the Zionist regime (and other individuals) often receive it. Such reprehensible diversions as schneidafunks are actualy harmful to the Jewish people and to America because they represent the desparate attempts to limit the free exchange of ideas which are necessary to find possible positive solutions to the many problems facing our nation and the world today. Therefore, the questions you have to ask yourself after reading his piece are: Why is he diverting our attention? and Who stands to benefit?
  • reinventit, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2Israel is a double edged sword.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 68 of 68 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.