Saturday, April 23, 2011

Who does the U.S. really support in the Middle East?

This article lends some perspective:

We Say We Support Israel but We Fight For Arabs

This article is brief enough, so below is the full commentary:

We Say We Support Israel but We Fight For Arabs

Think about it. Whenever American anti-Semites get their shorts in a twist over Jews and Muslims in that tiny little sliver of the Middle East, they start ranting about how much money the United States gives Israel—never mind the fact that economic aid ended years ago, and as for defense spending, much of it comes back to us. They also like to rant about the attack on the Liberty, a US Navy warship, that left 34 US seamen dead and another 170 wounded, the Liberty’s skipper being awarded a very honest Congressional Medal of Honor for his attempts to save his ship—in 1967.

But when is the last time America undertook military action on behalf of Israel?

It is a simple fact that since Vietnam, virtually all of America’s actions have been on behalf of Muslims to improve their lot. Desert Storm/Desert Shield, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Horn of Africa, Yemen and now Libya. Only one of those interventions, Bosnia, made cultural sense: the Bosnians were Central Europeans who wished to be more or less Western Europeans, who just happened to be Muslim. Indeed, you could reasonably argue that the Bosnians were in fact more culturally Western than their Orthodox Christian, Serbian murderers and torturers.

According to the Congressional Research Service report, US Foreign Aid to Israel, US foreign aid to Israel is $3 billion for FY 2011 and is projected at $3.09 billion a year, FY2012-FY2018. According to the CRS report
The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other

Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11, the cost of the Iraq and Afghan wars is $1.21 trillion. According to the Department of Defense Military Personnel and Casualty Statistics, 5945 American military personnel have been killed and 42,913 wounded in action since operations began in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraq in 2003 through 4 April of this year. Iraqi and Afghan casualties caused by the American overthrow of the established powers in Iraq and Afghanistan is estimated at about 100-109,000 documented violent civilian deaths in Iraq. While this does not break down by the source of death, i.e., whether the killers were American soldiers, Iraqi soldiers or police, or Iraqi insurgents, the number is almost surely low. (I do not know of a similar listing for Afghanistan.) However, by contrast, according to B’Tselem and the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since 1987 has claimed 7978 Palestinian lives and 1503 Israeli lives.


So, we say we support Israel, and go to war for Muslims. We harp about every last Palestinian killed by Israelis, even though we have killed far more Iraqis and Afghans than Israelis have Palestinians. And the exchange ratio of Afghans and Iraqis to Americans is going to be far higher than the exchange ratio of Palestinians to Israelis. (The Palestinian:Israeli exchange ratio is about 5.3:1).


America has ruined its economy and military by waging war to improve the Arab and Moslem worlds. Understandably, they don’t much appreciate it. Perhaps it’s time we stopped, and reengaged with Israel. Which has many faults, but in the years since 1948, under constant attack, taking in millions of desperate and destitute Jews who needed a home, Israel has made of itself a modern world with a vibrant economy. Perhaps we—America, Israel and perhaps Russia—could begin to speak to each other as friends and equals. And the Arab world? Nothing wrong with them that 60 years of creativity—creativity that the Arab world once possessed in vast quantity—won’t cure. American intervention surely has been no replacement for their own genius and compassion, and it has done us no good, either.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Scott, this is off the subject but I wanted to ask your opinion about mystery Babylon. Where do you think it is? Iraq?

~gearedup2go

Scott said...

gearedup

I believe it is Rome for a variety of reasons.

WHile I do agree that there are several cities "on 7 hills", none of them would have been as obvious at that time as Rome.

Also - why would any of the OTHER references to "7 hills" have required coded language? IOW, the only city that would have needed to to be "cloaked" in mysterious language would have been Rome - no where else (the reference to "Rome" would have been highly offensive to the Romans of that day, and this required the use of a tangential reference such as John used).

Plus, I believe that the post-Rapture catholic church will somehow merge into some kind of a "new-age" "religion" which will be run from Rome.

I also am in the camp that many of the references seen in Revelation 17 - references regarding this false religion - are directed to the catholic church:
The reference to "purple and scarlet", and being "drunk with the blood of the saints" is a historical reference to the era of catholic persecution against the saints - which has been the worse such persecution that the church has ever seen...

Additionally, unlike any of the other potential references, (as least as far as I am aware) - none of the other places offer the situation described in Revelation 18:

"Every sea captain and all who travel by ship, the sailors, and all who earn their living from the sea will stand far off. When they see the smoke of her burning they will exclaim "was there ever a city like this great city? "

I am unaware of any other "city on 7 hills" that can be seen like this, from the sea, as it perishes.

Just my opinion :)

Anonymous said...

Thanks Scott, that is an interesting analysis and I agree with it--particularly your point of the Catholic church.
As always the Bible is fascinating and when I read it the Holy Spirit prompts my thinking. :-)

~gearedup2go

DrNofog said...

It's been a few days and I hope Scott & EI weren't offended by my use of the term 'clowns' here. It is a term of endearment here in America... well, ummm... maybe depending on the "context, context, context" [as EI likes to say]...

I've just been very, very busy the past few days so I wuzn't able to keep up with you 'guys', [just to reiterate: "that I do, in fact, have a real life to tend to [every now and then]..."]

But I did happen to notice that there has been a lot of interesting news the past few days in the ME, EU, & US constantly moving forward so I guess it's hard to go back and respond to old posts.

Anyway, after awhile, I decided to quit pouting and come back to the forum. After all, contrary to all the vicious rumors, I am actually a very sensous, no, sensaa.. sensative, sensitive, yea, sensitive guy!

And now for my next contribution...
;)

DrNofog said...

Concerning the RCC, waaaaay back in the early 70s someone suggested that I read "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop.

It's a classic, defining book detailing the pagan Babylonian "Mystery Religion" origins of various Roman Catholic traditions, including the Pope's title of "Pontifus Maximus"; the title of all the Roman Emperors as the High Priest of the worshippers of Apollo!

Also, the open mitre-top crown the Pope wears is Dagon, the open-mouthed Babylonian fish god!

"Who knew!" [as Rodney Dangerfield was noted for saying.]
;D


BTW, EI, wut are 'trolly wars'?? ...or should I even ask...

Expected Imminently said...

DrNofog

I haven't long come home from a few days away, so I have only just replied to your 'clown' comment - which, went straight over the top of my head and I thought nowt of it!

I do realise how busy you must be, it’s just that I/we miss your comments :)

The Supermarket trolleys, big wire containers on wheels into which we place our groceries before paying at the till – some angry peeps use em as a battering ram to force a way through other customers.

Why, wot do ee call em? :D

Big Hug.

God bless
Sue

Expected Imminently said...

Scott and all

I do agree about 'Rome'; but I also think 'Ecclesiastical Babylon' involves ALL religions, not just R.C.

First and foremost it is a religious spirit that has inveigled itself through the Ecumenical Movement. For this reason alone, we MUST come apart and be separate.

One rotten apple placed into a barrel of good apples will soon infect the whole barrel, just as adding a good apple to a barrel of rotten ones; will not turn the decay to fresh.

It is na├»ve to think we will come out unscathed if we think we can have fellowship – ANY fellowship - with darkness, even those bearing the name ‘christian’. “Not all who say Lord, Lord …” Matt.7:21.

2 Cor.6: 14Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?
15. And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever?
16. And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will dwell in them And walk among them I will be their God, And they shall be My people."
17. Therefore "Come out from among them And be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, And I will receive you."
18. "I will be a Father to you, And you shall be My sons and daughters, Says the LORD Almighty

This is about obedience to God’s Word, and as much for our own sake, as His. These verses do not concern ‘losing Salvation’; but our loss of fellowship with our Heavenly Father when disobey and do what we think is a ‘good work’. 1John 1:9.

MARANATHA!

God bless
Sue