18 ms·

And in return for said aid, Israel has become an American puppet and stays about the size of New Jersey without us having to use force. Between sending in troo

And in return for said aid, Israel has become an American puppet and stays about the size of New Jersey without us having to use force. Between sending in troops and paying them, the US decided to pay. Imagine if a bully promised to not beat you up as long as he could pay you a small sum to sit in a corner in a fetal position all day. These politics are a lot more complex than you're making them out to be.

GhettoComputers 5y ago
If the US hated Israel it wouldn't have supported its creation, and last I checked the US is paying Israel not the opposite. Your analogy is stupid and pointless. Are you crying in a fetal position all day making analogies out of your own delusional fantasies?
- goboronshka 5y ago
  Yes sorry I mistyped, it was early, I meant the bully pays you to sit in the corner, otherwise he beats you up. Sure he's paying you, but it's still clearly coercive.
  - GhettoComputers 5y ago
    Israelis don't see the US as a bully. I have never heard of this viewpoint, Israel has settlers, it has borders, and if it chooses to change its borders the US won't be the bully, it will be a battle with the other countries in the middle east. I don't get any of your points, you are complaining about money that Israel takes and how its coersive, so you don't have to take the money? Trump moved the US embassy to Jersusalem, and the US gives billions of aid to Israel. What is your criteria for "antisemitism"? If accepting the capital of Israel, giving money, military aid, is your definition of antisemetic it dimimishes Nazis activity if you group aid into "bullying" and "antisemitism".
    - yyyk 5y ago
      Basically his position, when you strip out the inflammatory rhetoric, is that the US wants to keep Israel weak and dependent on US aid. i.e. Get Israel to make concessions (say returning the Sinai to Egypt), the US covers up for that with aid, but the aid can always be withdrawn (say if Israel dares make the US upset, or if some radical President is elected), leaving Israel dependent, and at risk in the long term. I don't think that accurately describes US policy anymore, if it ever did. Modern day US administrations have withdrawn from the world, and that means their ME policies are not determined by reality, but by domestic ideologies and domestic political considerations.
      - GhettoComputers 5y ago
        Are you Israeli? I read his rhetoric and I have never seen such ridiculous statements made by anyone. They are so disconnected from reality I never seen this kind of belief in my life.
        yyyk 5y ago
        I've read all kinds of absolutely insane rhetoric on I/P (way beyond this), I don't think much would surprise me anymore. That conflict used to generate way more of this type of rhetoric than anything else, but recently other issues seems to have caught up in this department...
  - KoftaBob 5y ago
    Hope the JIDF is paying you well.
- yyyk 5y ago
  >If the US hated Israel it wouldn't have supported its creation The US did not support Israel past the original vote, rather it tried to push a series of measures that would have been detrimental to Israel. At the time Israel was far more reliant on the USSR.
  - GhettoComputers 5y ago
    So it supported its creation just like I stated? What kind of antisemite country supports the creation of Israel? Do non antisemites by that logic not support the creation of Israel?
    - yyyk 5y ago
      I never said the US was an antisemitic country? Both that and 'the US unconditionally supports Israel' are myths. The US position is occasionally cynical but consistent and unemotional. Anyway, the US policy at the time was determined by the State Department which was very anti-Israel for various reasons. Truman overrode them for the US vote, but was too busy with other affairs to set policy afterwards.
      - GhettoComputers 5y ago
        My mistake I thought you supported the person that I originally responded to. Is that why they had kibbutz? I know Israel was more communist at the beginning and it even worked for a while, but they ended it. I remember Milton Friedman talking about how he liked Likud in the 60s.
        yyyk 5y ago
        Well, that was the local Socialists' idea of how to implement "a new society", not much to do with the USSR. It couldn't scale for obvious reasons, and their own descendants abandoned this almost entirely.
        GhettoComputers 5y ago

GhettoComputers 5y ago

If the US hated Israel it wouldn't have supported its creation, and last I checked the US is paying Israel not the opposite. Your analogy is stupid and pointless. Are you crying in a fetal position all day making analogies out of your own delusional fantasies?

goboronshka 5y ago
Yes sorry I mistyped, it was early, I meant the bully pays you to sit in the corner, otherwise he beats you up. Sure he's paying you, but it's still clearly coercive.
- GhettoComputers 5y ago
  Israelis don't see the US as a bully. I have never heard of this viewpoint, Israel has settlers, it has borders, and if it chooses to change its borders the US won't be the bully, it will be a battle with the other countries in the middle east. I don't get any of your points, you are complaining about money that Israel takes and how its coersive, so you don't have to take the money? Trump moved the US embassy to Jersusalem, and the US gives billions of aid to Israel. What is your criteria for "antisemitism"? If accepting the capital of Israel, giving money, military aid, is your definition of antisemetic it dimimishes Nazis activity if you group aid into "bullying" and "antisemitism".
  - yyyk 5y ago
    Basically his position, when you strip out the inflammatory rhetoric, is that the US wants to keep Israel weak and dependent on US aid. i.e. Get Israel to make concessions (say returning the Sinai to Egypt), the US covers up for that with aid, but the aid can always be withdrawn (say if Israel dares make the US upset, or if some radical President is elected), leaving Israel dependent, and at risk in the long term. I don't think that accurately describes US policy anymore, if it ever did. Modern day US administrations have withdrawn from the world, and that means their ME policies are not determined by reality, but by domestic ideologies and domestic political considerations.
    - GhettoComputers 5y ago
      Are you Israeli? I read his rhetoric and I have never seen such ridiculous statements made by anyone. They are so disconnected from reality I never seen this kind of belief in my life.
      - yyyk 5y ago
        I've read all kinds of absolutely insane rhetoric on I/P (way beyond this), I don't think much would surprise me anymore. That conflict used to generate way more of this type of rhetoric than anything else, but recently other issues seems to have caught up in this department...
- KoftaBob 5y ago
  Hope the JIDF is paying you well.
yyyk 5y ago
>If the US hated Israel it wouldn't have supported its creation The US did not support Israel past the original vote, rather it tried to push a series of measures that would have been detrimental to Israel. At the time Israel was far more reliant on the USSR.
- GhettoComputers 5y ago
  So it supported its creation just like I stated? What kind of antisemite country supports the creation of Israel? Do non antisemites by that logic not support the creation of Israel?
  - yyyk 5y ago
    I never said the US was an antisemitic country? Both that and 'the US unconditionally supports Israel' are myths. The US position is occasionally cynical but consistent and unemotional. Anyway, the US policy at the time was determined by the State Department which was very anti-Israel for various reasons. Truman overrode them for the US vote, but was too busy with other affairs to set policy afterwards.
    - GhettoComputers 5y ago
      My mistake I thought you supported the person that I originally responded to. Is that why they had kibbutz? I know Israel was more communist at the beginning and it even worked for a while, but they ended it. I remember Milton Friedman talking about how he liked Likud in the 60s.
      - yyyk 5y ago
        Well, that was the local Socialists' idea of how to implement "a new society", not much to do with the USSR. It couldn't scale for obvious reasons, and their own descendants abandoned this almost entirely.
        GhettoComputers 5y ago