I am not Pats, but i presume you are talking to me. And people would be foolish to think that the US isnt a huge supporter of israel.
But there are many people (who aren't in bed with Israel) who think that Israel is an important strategic ally of the US.
And while the US gives Israel alot of money, if you check the records you would see that Israel also gives a ton to the palestinians, pakistanis, lebanase and they have already given billions to rebuild Iraq.
And don't think for a second that our problems with Muslim terrorists would end if we stopped helping Israel.
I seldom get personal, but what an ignorant statement. There is no country in the world that has suffered more at the hands of terrorists than Israel.
You make it sound like Israel never takes military action. Of course, every time they do use military force to defend themselves, the whole world rallies to the side of their opponent.
What an idiot. (Sorry, Wil, but I can't help it.)
But that is a false premise. Israel is not in Iraq because they are not allowed in Iraq and not because "they had no need to participate". The retarded point OP was trying to make was that somehow israel does not want to do the leg work and that they are letting america do all the dirty work.
Israel would want to do alot more of the dirty work in that region but are being restrained from doing so by outside influences (UN/Europe/UN/Moderate Middle Eastern countries).
Well that's where we disagree, which is fair between the two of us.
I believe that in fact Israel is staying out not because of being "restrained" but quite simply because their goals (of racking on the Hussein regime) have been achieved by the US military without their having to put any of their own at risk.
It certainly makes for decent public relations to kayfabe and act is if they would be right on the scene if not 'restrained". But it's all an act.
And a rather sensible one on the part of Israel, I'll acknowledge.
I believe that in fact Israel is staying out not because of being "restrained" but quite simply because their goals (of racking on the Hussein regime) have been achieved by the US military without their having to put any of their own at risk.
It certainly makes for decent public relations to kayfabe and act is if they would be right on the scene if not 'restrained". But it's all an act.
And a rather sensible one on the part of Israel, I'll acknowledge.
The difference i have with you is that whether Israel would want to send troops to Iraq or not is not the issue. They are simply NOT ALLOWED to go. So whether they are receiving some great free benefit or not can be debated, however, i don't think anyone can suggest that it is part of some plan of theirs.
Yeah, maybe they are sitting back and saying "thank god the americans are doing our dirty work," but if it isn't their doing, then who really cares?
