6 ms·

Hungary aside, most of Israel's allies in the region are dictatorships, actaully all of them: Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Morocco (arguably, let's agree i

Hungary aside, most of Israel's allies in the region are dictatorships, actaully all of them: Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Morocco (arguably, let's agree it's not a liberal democracy) and so on and so on. There are zero democracies in the area. So it's easy to see Israel's interest in supplying technology to those regimes and assuring good relations; it's not like the oppositions to these dictators are any better, the Muslim Brotherhood is appalling. Now Hungary isn't really important to Israel and is part of the EU, may have been wiser to not do that. > This is Netanyahu's legacy, a proto dictator, arming dictators. Isn't the U.S selling arms to Saudi Arabia?

mola 5y ago
In the area, I agree. But Netanyahu chose to spurn democratic European allies and allign Israel with Hungary and Poland. Basically he made western Europe an enemy of Israel because he chose settlements over a peace process, to alleviate the foreign pressure he alligned Israel with Hungary and Poland, also helping Russia with its cold European conflict. > Isn't the U.S selling arms to Saudi Arabia? How's that relevant? If you're fishing for hypocrisy, be assured I dislike the US take on democracy and it's leaders of late no less than Netanyahu. But At least the US has a constitution, checks and balances. And a tradition of freedom and democracy. Israel has a growing population, the parts that grow are mostly lacking any sense of democratic values or tradition. Guess which electorate Netanyahu spurned and which he focused his Messiyah propaganda on.
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  I'm not fishing for hypocrisy, that's quite a strong word. But there is some bias I'm sensing here. You would probably never say "Obama's legacy is arming dictators" though it's part of his legacy for sure. Merkel's as well. > And a tradition of freedom and democracy The U.S was a de facto apartheid state until the 60s. The UK castrated gays up until quite recently. Liberal democracy as we know it today is quite new. I'm not a Netanyahu fan, quite far from it, but bias is bias.
  - mromanuk 5y ago
    And don’t forget all the coups the US has forged in Latam and Africa, the first years of the patriot act (NSA spying on citizens), putting kids in cages, et cetera.
  - pessimizer 5y ago
    US and UK policy isn't at all confused about that - Israel couldn't operate the way it does without our support and direct subsidy. Both countries also use Israeli crowd control and intelligence tech on their domestic populations, just like all of those Sunni royal families attacking their Shia populations. It's only the West Wing fans that are confused about how their country works.
    - joelbluminator 5y ago
      Thanks for the support btw :)
himinlomax 5y ago
> There are zero democracies in the area Lebanon used to be more democratic; Iran was democratic at one point. What happened to Mossadegh?
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  Neither of them was democratic as in liberal, free press, human rights etc etc. Iran afaik was a full blown dictatorship before the islamic revolution (it's still a dictatorship, but different), Lebanon's history is more complicated but I stand by my view that it was never a liberal democracy, definitely not in the last 40 years.
  - andrepd 5y ago
    >Iran afaik was a full blown dictatorship before the islamic revolution Yes, but he was talking about before that wasn't he? Iran was a democracy (flawed, but still) before the US–UK alliance overthrew the parliamentary system and installed a puppet dictator, to keep stealing their oil.
    - joelbluminator 5y ago
      I'm no expert on the history of Iran, but no, it doesn't seem it ever was (Most countries in the region ever were or are one now). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_State_of_Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_S... "The reign of Reza Shah was totalitarian and dictatorial at a time when totalitarian governments and dictatorships were common in the Middle East and the world[8] and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was some years in the future."
      - rjsw 5y ago
        It was more of a democracy before the 1953 coup [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...
andrepd 5y ago
> So it's easy to see Israel's interest in supplying technology to those regimes and assuring good relations; It's easy to see that it's in my interest to kill a woman on an unlit street and nick her purse. What kind of argument is this?? It's especially aggravating since so much propaganda comes out touting Israel as a democracy and decrying the savage Palestinians for being a dictatorship.
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  It's probably not in your interest since you'd go to jail and the whole metaphor seems quite simplistic to me. Since you seem to be talking about ethics, not interests, If Israel supports Egypt's El-Sisi is that immoral? Yes he is a despot, but the opposition is worse. Same can be said about Israel's support to the Palestinian Authority. It's quite difficult to know what the right thing to do is. Israel wants good relation with these countries for obvious reasons.
  - cmmeur01 5y ago
    They support who they can control, that’s it. Nothing to do with them thinking one is better for the citizens living under their selected rulers control. Israel doesn’t care about half the people within its borders. Saying they choose who to support based on how that person will treat their citizens is laughable.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - joelbluminator 5y ago
      > They support who they can control, that’s it. Or they support who won't try to destroy them, see - I said it in a non demonizing way. > Saying they choose who to support based on how that person will treat their citizens is laughable I wasn't saying that. I was just saying, at least in the case of Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia (and also the Palestinian Authority), it's not clear at all that selling them tech/arms is immoral.
  - 5y ago
pessimizer 5y ago
> Isn't the U.S selling arms to Saudi Arabia? The US and UK sell arms to all of these countries. That's not a good sign; the US even directly subsidizes the military and police of some of them. We like dictatorships that make our political donors money.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  I’d argue that we like dictatorships that align with our strategic interests. Raytheon doesn’t really care who we sell arms to, as long as they get sold. The politicians want to back anyone that’ll push back against our mortal enemy <strike>the USSR</strike> Iran.
dogorman 5y ago
> Hungary aside, most of Israel's allies in the region are dictatorships Not just in the region. In the 1970s, Israel worked with apartheid South Africa to develop nuclear weapons. South Africa has subsequently been disarmed, but Israel has not been. Incidentally, in 1963 JFK was trying to stop Israel's nuclear weapons program because American intelligence had failed to turn up any evidence that other countries in the region were pursuing the same. In a letter to Ben-Gurion, JFK wrote: > "I can well appreciate your concern for developments in the UAR. But I see no present or imminent nuclear threat to Israel from there. I am assured that our intelligence on this question is good and that the Egyptians do not presently have any installation comparable to Dimona, nor any facilities potentially capable of nuclear weapons production. But, of course, if you have information that would support a contrary conclusion, I should like to receive it from you through Ambassador Barbour. We have the capacity to check it." Egypt never developed nuclear weapons.
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  Well times changed, Iran is very close to nuclear weapons
  - speeder 5y ago
    in response to Israel developing them first... So I guess strategically for Israel, making nukes was a mistake.
    - joelbluminator 5y ago
      Great theory. If it wasn't for Israel there would be world peace.

mola 5y ago

In the area, I agree. But Netanyahu chose to spurn democratic European allies and allign Israel with Hungary and Poland. Basically he made western Europe an enemy of Israel because he chose settlements over a peace process, to alleviate the foreign pressure he alligned Israel with Hungary and Poland, also helping Russia with its cold European conflict. > Isn't the U.S selling arms to Saudi Arabia? How's that relevant? If you're fishing for hypocrisy, be assured I dislike the US take on democracy and it's leaders of late no less than Netanyahu. But At least the US has a constitution, checks and balances. And a tradition of freedom and democracy. Israel has a growing population, the parts that grow are mostly lacking any sense of democratic values or tradition. Guess which electorate Netanyahu spurned and which he focused his Messiyah propaganda on.

joelbluminator 5y ago
I'm not fishing for hypocrisy, that's quite a strong word. But there is some bias I'm sensing here. You would probably never say "Obama's legacy is arming dictators" though it's part of his legacy for sure. Merkel's as well. > And a tradition of freedom and democracy The U.S was a de facto apartheid state until the 60s. The UK castrated gays up until quite recently. Liberal democracy as we know it today is quite new. I'm not a Netanyahu fan, quite far from it, but bias is bias.
- mromanuk 5y ago
  And don’t forget all the coups the US has forged in Latam and Africa, the first years of the patriot act (NSA spying on citizens), putting kids in cages, et cetera.
- pessimizer 5y ago
  US and UK policy isn't at all confused about that - Israel couldn't operate the way it does without our support and direct subsidy. Both countries also use Israeli crowd control and intelligence tech on their domestic populations, just like all of those Sunni royal families attacking their Shia populations. It's only the West Wing fans that are confused about how their country works.
  - joelbluminator 5y ago
    Thanks for the support btw :)

himinlomax 5y ago

> There are zero democracies in the area Lebanon used to be more democratic; Iran was democratic at one point. What happened to Mossadegh?

joelbluminator 5y ago
Neither of them was democratic as in liberal, free press, human rights etc etc. Iran afaik was a full blown dictatorship before the islamic revolution (it's still a dictatorship, but different), Lebanon's history is more complicated but I stand by my view that it was never a liberal democracy, definitely not in the last 40 years.
- andrepd 5y ago
  >Iran afaik was a full blown dictatorship before the islamic revolution Yes, but he was talking about before that wasn't he? Iran was a democracy (flawed, but still) before the US–UK alliance overthrew the parliamentary system and installed a puppet dictator, to keep stealing their oil.
  - joelbluminator 5y ago
    I'm no expert on the history of Iran, but no, it doesn't seem it ever was (Most countries in the region ever were or are one now). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_State_of_Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_S... "The reign of Reza Shah was totalitarian and dictatorial at a time when totalitarian governments and dictatorships were common in the Middle East and the world[8] and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was some years in the future."
    - rjsw 5y ago
      It was more of a democracy before the 1953 coup [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...

andrepd 5y ago

> So it's easy to see Israel's interest in supplying technology to those regimes and assuring good relations; It's easy to see that it's in my interest to kill a woman on an unlit street and nick her purse. What kind of argument is this?? It's especially aggravating since so much propaganda comes out touting Israel as a democracy and decrying the savage Palestinians for being a dictatorship.

joelbluminator 5y ago
It's probably not in your interest since you'd go to jail and the whole metaphor seems quite simplistic to me. Since you seem to be talking about ethics, not interests, If Israel supports Egypt's El-Sisi is that immoral? Yes he is a despot, but the opposition is worse. Same can be said about Israel's support to the Palestinian Authority. It's quite difficult to know what the right thing to do is. Israel wants good relation with these countries for obvious reasons.
- cmmeur01 5y ago
  They support who they can control, that’s it. Nothing to do with them thinking one is better for the citizens living under their selected rulers control. Israel doesn’t care about half the people within its borders. Saying they choose who to support based on how that person will treat their citizens is laughable.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - joelbluminator 5y ago
    > They support who they can control, that’s it. Or they support who won't try to destroy them, see - I said it in a non demonizing way. > Saying they choose who to support based on how that person will treat their citizens is laughable I wasn't saying that. I was just saying, at least in the case of Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia (and also the Palestinian Authority), it's not clear at all that selling them tech/arms is immoral.
- 5y ago

pessimizer 5y ago

> Isn't the U.S selling arms to Saudi Arabia? The US and UK sell arms to all of these countries. That's not a good sign; the US even directly subsidizes the military and police of some of them. We like dictatorships that make our political donors money.

ashtonkem 5y ago
I’d argue that we like dictatorships that align with our strategic interests. Raytheon doesn’t really care who we sell arms to, as long as they get sold. The politicians want to back anyone that’ll push back against our mortal enemy <strike>the USSR</strike> Iran.

dogorman 5y ago

> Hungary aside, most of Israel's allies in the region are dictatorships Not just in the region. In the 1970s, Israel worked with apartheid South Africa to develop nuclear weapons. South Africa has subsequently been disarmed, but Israel has not been. Incidentally, in 1963 JFK was trying to stop Israel's nuclear weapons program because American intelligence had failed to turn up any evidence that other countries in the region were pursuing the same. In a letter to Ben-Gurion, JFK wrote: > "I can well appreciate your concern for developments in the UAR. But I see no present or imminent nuclear threat to Israel from there. I am assured that our intelligence on this question is good and that the Egyptians do not presently have any installation comparable to Dimona, nor any facilities potentially capable of nuclear weapons production. But, of course, if you have information that would support a contrary conclusion, I should like to receive it from you through Ambassador Barbour. We have the capacity to check it." Egypt never developed nuclear weapons.

joelbluminator 5y ago
Well times changed, Iran is very close to nuclear weapons
- speeder 5y ago
  in response to Israel developing them first... So I guess strategically for Israel, making nukes was a mistake.
  - joelbluminator 5y ago
    Great theory. If it wasn't for Israel there would be world peace.