|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announced Thursday that an unconditional humanitarian cease-fire will begin at 8 a.m. local time in Gaza. It will last for a period of 72 hours unless extended, they said in a joint statement. During this time the forces on the ground will remain in place. |
I read today, that Israel is claiming to have destroyed 80% of tunnels, and will have all (that they're aware of) in a few days.
Link - ( New Window )
Ceasefire now really only does prolong the 60year war
Also wondering how Hamas agreed with a "cease fire" that would allow Israel to continue to destroy their underground network.
I suppose if you lived in Texas and the Mexicans were launching missiles into your city that you'd want the US government to just ignore it?
The problem with Scarborough's commentary is that he, like people all over the world, are relying on death figures that that are being provided by Hamas, effectively.
OK. So who runs the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza? Hamas does. As for the U.N., it gets its data mainly from two Palestinian agitprop NGOs, one of which, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, offers the remarkably precise statistic that, as of July 27, exactly 82% of deaths in Gaza have been civilians. Curiously, during the 2008-09 Gaza war, the center also reported an 82% civilian casualty rate.
Source
This site also has a really good breakdown of the demographics of Palestinians who died per the information released by Al Jazeera and it shows that Israel is targeting Hamas combatants. It is as of July 23
http://www.israellycool.com/2014/07/23/new-analysis-of-gazan-casualties-in-operation-protective-edge-as-of-july-23rd/ - ( New Window )
Last friday, after visiting Egypt, Kerry proposed a ceasefire basically using Hamas's demands as the guideline,along the 1967 borders, which would reduce israel to 8 miles wide at certain stretches.
Israel initially rejected this proposition, and reacted angrily. Yesterday, as Prime minister Netanyahu met with his cabinet to discuss whether or not they would made the push onto the command and manufacturing bunkers, He recieved a call from the U.S. President.
The full transcript is below, translated from Hebrew, courtesy of The Times of Israel:
Barack Obama: I demand that Israel agrees to an immediate, unilateral ceasefire and halt all offensive activities, in particular airstrikes.
Benjamin Netanyahu: And what will Israel receive in exchange for a ceasefire?
BO: I believe that Hamas will cease its rocket fire — silence will be met with silence.
BN: Hamas broke all five previous ceasefires. It’s a terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel.
BO: I repeat and expect Israel to stop all its military activities unilaterally. The pictures of destruction in Gaza distance the world from Israel’s position.
BN: Kerry’s proposal was completely unrealistic and gives Hamas military and diplomatic advantages.
BO: Within a week of the end of Israel’s military activities, Qatar and Turkey will begin negotiations with Hamas based on the 2012 understandings, including Israel’s commitment to removing the siege restrictions on Gaza.
BN: Qatar and Turkey are the biggest supporters of Hamas. It’s impossible to rely on them to be fair mediators.
BO: I trust Qatar and Turkey. Israel is not in the position that it can choose its mediators.
BN: I protest because Hamas can continue to launch rockets and use tunnels for terror attacks –
BO: (interrupting Netanyahu) The ball’s in Israel’s court, and it must end all its military activities.
This was reported yeaterday. Both Obama and the Israeli govt say This sin't exactly what happened, but the details were leaked By a US white house staffer, so it was clear at least from this morning that the White house wanted the world to think it had applied this pressure to Israel/
Personally, I think it amounts to a strategic defeat for Israel.The US position seems to now be that Israel should return to it's 67 borders. This is Huge, and a reversal of a 47 year old US policy.We have never before held the psotion we do now on Israeli occupation. Israel is pulling it's hair out and by and large is feeling betrayed, even the Israeli left which typically supports Hamas.
My own analysis is that Israel waited too long,( it also had a ceasefire last week)It dawdled over whether or not to call up and mobilize the reserves necessary to complete the operation, and the opportunity is lost.Implicit in the US demands were also that The blockade be lifted, and US 50 million dollars of aid is immediately designated for Hamas.They will be able to resupply and rebuild, as the US wants the naval blockade lifted as well. Israel will not have a chance again to strike at Hamas until this administration leaves power, at the earliest, and that's assuming Clinton doesn't Follow on into the white house next.
http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/07/29/operation-%E2%80%98protective-edge%E2%80%99-day-22-in-leaked-transcript-of-call-with-netanyahu-obama-demands-unilateral-ceasefire-rejects-israeli-objection-to-mediators-qatar-and-turkey-live-updat/
The only somewhat positive news (and a gripe of Hamas) is that Israeli forces will indeed remain in the region and will continue to destroy those terror tunnels. But yes, no doubt Hamas will resupply and use this breather to regroup.
And frankly, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Hamas won't abide by the ceasefire and will continue to shoot rockets. It's their M.O.
I'll assume that's just a sign of good faith
I'll assume that's just a sign of good faith
Yeah, I'm sure Hamas is getting all the rockets out of their system in preparation for the ceasefire!
Whether that exchange was true or just 'leaked' to make it seem that the US is putting heat on Israel for the sake of our 'allies' Qatar, Turkey and Iran, who knows.
And (I pray this isn't true) but there are reports that and IDF soldier was kidnapped (after the cease fire).
Fuck Hamas
Had to shake my head while chuckling at it, especially the child in a suicide vest.
And (I pray this isn't true) but there are reports that and IDF soldier was kidnapped (after the cease fire).
Fuck Hamas
Evidently the IDF has told the UN they fear he was kidnapped. The UN was then to tell Egypt who's trying to broker a ceasefire.
Looks like they had a suicide bomb attack against the soldiers and during the ensuing confusion they kidnapped one
Link - ( New Window )
And guess whose feed I saw that cartoon on?...;)
Here is PJ O'Rourke's recollection of the events:
"Village Voice reporter Joe Conason and I had been tipped off about the walkout, and when we got to the church, we found Bea Zobel, one of Cory Aquino's top aides, in a tizzy. "The women are terrified," she said. "They're scared to go home. They don't know what to do. We don't know what to do." Joe and I suggested that Mrs. Zobel go to the Manila Hotel and bring back some members of the Congressional observer team. She came back with Kerry, who did nothing.
Kerry later said that he didn't talk to the COMELEC employees then because he wasn't allowed to. [A bone-head Rolling Stone fact-checker sent the article to Kerry's Senate office for comment. Kerry staffers were wroth and insisted the senator's version of events be included.] This is ridiculous. He was ushered into an area that had been cordoned off from the press and the crowd and where the computer operators were sitting. To talk to the women, all he would have had to do was raise his voice. Why he was reluctant, I can't tell you. I can tell you what any red-blooded representative of the U.S. Government should have done. He should have shouted, "If you're frightened for your safety, I'll take you to the American embassy, and damn the man who tries to stop me." But all Kerry did was walk around like a male model in a concerned and thoughtful pose.
And there you have probably the only comparison of Kerry to a male model ever made."
O'Rourke noted in 2004 that he's "had a nonpartisan grudge against John Kerry for 18 years" over this incident. And ever since I read O'Rourke's account I have as well. John Kerry had a chance to actually do something meaningful as a US Senator and instead he chose to uselessly walk around and preen as the well coiffed empty-suit that he is.
No. It's not all Kerry's fault. At the same time, that doesn't mean he hasn't made mistakes. I'm linking a David Ignatius (certainly no right wing ideologue) op ed commenting on recent cease fire negotiations.
Link - ( New Window )
You have to wonder, at what point will the Gazans get sick of Hamas? They are ruling Gaza like a dictatorship - running it down to the ground. This is not the Gaza the Israelis handed over any more.
The real question is why this wasn't more widely reported before the current violence started? As it stands now, the last thing on the minds of the residents of Gaza is where the Hamas leader lives.
A good starting point is to actually attempt some satire instead of rehashing 30 year old Reaganisms that were colossally stupid in first place.
A good starting point is to actually attempt some satire instead of rehashing 30 year old Reaganisms that were colossally stupid in first place.
dude no offense but what the heck are you talking about?
Also that first cartoon is perfectly accurate and satirical.
Link - ( New Window )
He, on behalf of his boss, is trying to stop the carnage. Clumsily, no doubt (as is his custom), but not in a manner that's selling out Israel like that shitty cartoon fabricates.
He, on behalf of his boss, is trying to stop the carnage. Clumsily, no doubt (as is his custom), but not in a manner that's selling out Israel like that shitty cartoon fabricates.
With respect to the first cartoon, and allowing for some hyperbole present in political cartoons of all points of view, please take a look at the Ignatius op ed I linked above.
Note the word "exaggeration" as an aspect of satire. Pretty widely used by all sides in satire.
[...]
Kerry's mistake isn't any bias against Israel, but a bias in favor of an executable, short-term deal.
And Exaggeration, Big Al, is over-stating something that's true. Here they're just making shit up because they hate the SoS. The cartoon sucks.
With different text, the first one could have been at least passable (the baby is funny). The second one is an irredeemable steaming dog turd.
Frankly if I was left alone in a room with John Kerry I'd be mighty tempted to beat him to death with my bare hands.
Regardless, If one holds the position that Israel should mercilessly eradicate Hamas once and for all (even in the face of American pleas for a cease fire), fine. On some level I agree. But the suggestion that America is selling out Israel (or has ever, or will ever) is complete crap. Our mouth is so full of their jizz that it could fill the Dead Sea. Good thing pineapples are kosher.
When I heard Kerry on that hot mike, it made sense. The sarcastic 'that's some pin point accuracy' was bad enough. But the 'We've got to get over there' as if he and only he could 'fix this' just shows his supreme arrogance. Israelis are fed up with it.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/caroline-glick/israel-hamas-and-obamas-foreign-policy/
From above:
"Until Obama made the call, there was lingering doubt among some Israelis regarding his intentions. Some thought that US Secretary of State John Kerry might have been acting of his own accord last Friday night when he tried to force Israel to accept Hamas’s cease-fire terms.
But then Obama made his phone call. And all doubts were dispelled.
Kerry is just a loyal steward of Obama’s foreign policy.
Obama is siding with Hamas, and its Muslim Brotherhood patrons in Qatar and Turkey, against Israel, and its Sunni Arab supporters – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates."
.........................................................
The Israelis are not appreciative of Obama's latest demands
"Speaking to Israel’s Army Radio, Housing and Construction Minister Uri Ariel criticized Obama telling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that there should be an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
“Leave us alone,” Ariel told Army Radio, directing his words at Obama. “Go focus on Syria.”
Read more at http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2014/07/take-hike-israeli-official-obama-leave-us-alone/#5HJ126zlaV3YWAcQ.99
Palestinian Authority officials were irate late week upon learning Kerry had adopted nearly all of Hamas’s positions in his most recent ceasefire proposal. Asharq Al-Awsat, a Palestinian daily published in Ramallah, quoted an unnamed but reportedly senior PA official as saying, "Kerry tried to sabotage the PA by ignoring the Egyptian cease fire plan that we [Palestinian Authority] and Israel had already both accepted.”
The Palestinian official went on to claim that the Kerry plan “repeatedly demonstrates a complete and fundamental misunderstanding of the Middle East.” “Kerry’s plan," he said, was written to “appease Hamas and its allies, Qatar and Turkey.” He didn’t even have the “decency to inform relevant officials in Cairo, Ramallah or Israel."
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/28/Leave-Us-Alone-Already-Israeli-Leader-Tells-Obama
BLUCHER!!
Quote:
.
Whats is breitbart?
You posted a link to an article from Breitbart. No wonder you're confused by Rob's statement...
Could not agree more and i would add the following:
"Defending his team, and/or using a situation to try to create a BS point for his team based on one sides political talking points."
montanagiant : 6:02 pm : link : reply
The fact that it was this Admin who requested and funded the majority of the "Iron Dome" defense system Israel has?
Won't post all the resources used below but all were found simply by googling various questions.
1) Overall the US funds roughly 22% of Israel's total military defense budget. (Hardly majority funding.)
2) Apparently Israel itself funded 100% of the initial development and deployment of the 1st two Iron Dome batteries, with all of that funding (or at least the vast majority of it) going to Israeli tech firms who developed the tracking capacity and well everything else involved in the system until it was actually deployed and proved effective, from Wikipedia with footnote source annotation:
Your "...this administration... funded the majority of the Iron Dome System...." includes ZERO of the start-up and development cost.
Going forward from now until 2017, the US has committed to spend something like $900 million on the Iron Dome, but it's hardly a pure handout via at least 2 accounts:
1st the US has demanded that Israel share the technology (100% Israeli developed proprietary technology, to repeat) with the US. That's at least partly paying for proprietary technology, not a "funding handout."
2nd whereas something like 3% of the total expenditure for the Iron Dome up until 2011 or 2012 or so was paid to US contractors, Obama (following Congress's demands) is demanding that ultimately 55% of the US funds that in the future will support the Iron Dome be paid to US based contractors. That's as much propping up the US defense sector economy as it is a flat handout to Israel's Iron Dome...
3rd the most recent wave of funding is dedicated to replenishing Israel's stock of Iron Dome missiles, each one of which costs something between $60,000 to $100,000 depending on the source you believe.
- Funding the re-supply of Tamir interceptor missiles, is kinda like bribing Israel to accept US policy decisions re ceasefires, etc.
3) Regarding expenditures to date re the Iron Dome, The Jewish Virtual Library has this info:
I did not find a date on the above quoted articles, but "has now paid" must be after May 28th 2014 because a Bloomsburg Businessweek article of that date is referenced as a source for the above info.
More links:
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120430/DEFREG04/304300003/U-S-Attaches-Strings-Israeli-Iron-Dome-Funds
http://aviationweek.com/defense/iron-dome-repels-hamas-rockets
Contra-Israel POV FYI: http://thebulletin.org/israel%E2%80%99s-iron-dome-misplaced-debate7349
wikipedia - ( New Window )
We understand how personal this conflict is for you, and we all hope for your and your loved ones' safety. However, your continued sense of entitlement regarding the role of the United States in defense of Israel in your posts along with your criticism of how the United States is either not doing enough or how the United States had little to do with Israel's security is becoming old real fast.
You can hope for security without continuing to bite the hand that has been most responsible for your nation's security.
If we were smart, and we haven't been, we'd just shut up and let Israel take care of Hamas. All these ridiculous cease fires do is let Hamas off the hook and reload for the next round. And then we have to pay to fix up the Palestinians and give more money to Israel to defend itself against the new rockets that Hamas get. It's insane.
I don't think we have that much of a moral high ground when it comes to telling Israel to do a ceasefire with Hamas. We wouldn't in their situation.
The sense of entitlement get a bit much, in my opinion.
You, and one or two others here mentioned a "sense of entitlement" in my posts, and frankly I don't get why. Above I am responding to montanagiant's completely unsupported post that "the US funded the majority of the Iron Dome." I googled and then read most of 5 articles about the funding of the Iron Dome, and nowhere did I see that observation so I posted some of the stuff I did find.
Instead of bitching about my tone, why don't you find evidence to support montanagiant's claim?
Yes, the US has agreed to fund the lion's share of the Iron Dome costs going forward, the vast majority of which is resupply of the Tamirs that have been used and adding additional batteries of the weapon. That's promised future spending, not what has already been spent which was what montana stated...
Oh BTW I do have a kinda "sense of entitlement" that dates back to how the entire world handled WWII and Hitler's holocaust mission. But I hardly think that's entering my post above, or any previous post on the current situation.
BTW, how much does the US prop up South Korea's military? I have no idea what the US spends at the minimum to keep troops stationed there and couldn't easily find the data.
And the US plans to sell 100 F-35s to Turkey, and has agreed to sell 20 to Israel. I'm leery of that, and where O'Bama is going vis a vis trusting Turkey and Qatar as US allies. That doesn't bother you?
Turkey will be a very interesting country to follow going forward under Erdogan, the guy makes me very nervous and has been a pretty big human rights violator regarding his opposition.
And then the whole recent ceasefire(s) have been a disaster, from leaving out the PA/Egypt and just expecting Israel to go along with whatever Hamas/Turkey/Qatar demanded. And now forcing Israel into a ceasefire only to have it backfire when a soldier is kidnapped.
Don't think the US needs to back Israel unconditionally but they are trying some form of tough live which won't working
I have recently been very critical of Kerry's "efforts" and Obama's latest stance, but I sure as heck aren't the only guy on BBI that thinks Kerry is a dufus, at least in this instance.
And Obama might me one had giveth and the other takes away by association with Turkey and Qatar... Turkey is an Israeli "ally" but a rather uncomfortable one under Erdogan.
In the end, unless it's to the benefit of the US national security interests, I don't think the US owes Israel anything beyond what a normal alliance would provide, so yes, I think your sense of entitlement (as you said, I'm not the only one who got the impression reading your litany of threads/posts on this topic in the past few months) is apparent and getting old.
And I'm not really sure why you're bringing up S. Korea as a counterpoint. I don't see anyone on here whining about how the US isn't doing enough or has done a bad job for S. Korea or the situation on the peninsula. Only one whining about the US not doing enough for their nation is you.
And I wonder if montana remembers that the Iron Dome is based on SDI, which was Reagan's initiative that was ridiculed by the Dems and called Star Wars.
And yes, Kerry is a dufus.
And I wonder if montana remembers that the Iron Dome is based on SDI, which was Reagan's initiative that was ridiculed by the Dems and called Star Wars.
And yes, Kerry is a dufus.
Who's been condemning Israel's obligation to defend itself? Because you give support to your allies to defend itself doesn't mean you have to like the way they do it, yet you don't see the US pulling its support back.
And I think the first paragraph from BlueLou's previous post (in another thread) pretty much sums up why I made my earlier comments. Because this is the reason why the US has maintained its backing of Israel...give me a fucking break.
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
By the way, do any of those cartoon sources have one showing
montanagiant : 6:02 pm : link : reply
The fact that it was this Admin who requested and funded the majority of the "Iron Dome" defense system Israel has?
Won't post all the resources used below but all were found simply by googling various questions.
1) Overall the US funds roughly 22% of Israel's total military defense budget. (Hardly majority funding.)
2) Apparently Israel itself funded 100% of the initial development and deployment of the 1st two Iron Dome batteries, with all of that funding (or at least the vast majority of it) going to Israeli tech firms who developed the tracking capacity and well everything else involved in the system until it was actually deployed and proved effective, from Wikipedia with footnote source annotation:
Quote:
The initial funding and development of the Iron Dome system was provided and undertaken by Israel.[27] This allowed for the deployment of the first two Iron Dome systems.[28]
Your "...this administration... funded the majority of the Iron Dome System...." includes ZERO of the start-up and development cost.
Going forward from now until 2017, the US has committed to spend something like $900 million on the Iron Dome, but it's hardly a pure handout via at least 2 accounts:
1st the US has demanded that Israel share the technology (100% Israeli developed proprietary technology, to repeat) with the US. That's at least partly paying for proprietary technology, not a "funding handout."
2nd whereas something like 3% of the total expenditure for the Iron Dome up until 2011 or 2012 or so was paid to US contractors, Obama (following Congress's demands) is demanding that ultimately 55% of the US funds that in the future will support the Iron Dome be paid to US based contractors. That's as much propping up the US defense sector economy as it is a flat handout to Israel's Iron Dome...
Quote:
In May 2014, the Israeli government agreed to spend more than half the funds allocated by the U.S. Congress for Iron Dome funding to be spent on contractors in the United States. The agreement stipulates that funds spent in the America will jump to 55% of the total allocations by 2015, a marked increase from 3% previously.
- from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/IronDome.html
3rd the most recent wave of funding is dedicated to replenishing Israel's stock of Iron Dome missiles, each one of which costs something between $60,000 to $100,000 depending on the source you believe.
- Funding the re-supply of Tamir interceptor missiles, is kinda like bribing Israel to accept US policy decisions re ceasefires, etc.
3) Regarding expenditures to date re the Iron Dome, The Jewish Virtual Library has this info:
Quote:
In May 2012, President Obama directed US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to allocate an additional $70 million to pay for more Iron Dome batteries and interceptor missiles in Israel. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak had come to the States during the month to seek further resource allocation and thanked the administration for helping upkeep a system which has proven successful in saving lives and preventing an escalation in violence. The United States has now paid nearly $300 million for the Iron Dome system.
The italics are mine.
I did not find a date on the above quoted articles, but "has now paid" must be after May 28th 2014 because a Bloomsburg Businessweek article of that date is referenced as a source for the above info.
More links:
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120430/DEFREG04/304300003/U-S-Attaches-Strings-Israeli-Iron-Dome-Funds
http://aviationweek.com/defense/iron-dome-repels-hamas-rockets
Contra-Israel POV FYI: http://thebulletin.org/israel%E2%80%99s-iron-dome-misplaced-debate7349 wikipedia - ( New Window )
Sure i can:
1)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome
The link has all the webpages listed to substantiate the claim. Those links are numbered above in the quoted area
2)
The Iron Dome system has emerged as a game-changer in the current round of violence, with Israeli officials citing a success rate as high as 90 percent.
The system uses radar, advanced tracking technology and anti-missile batteries to follow the trajectory of an incoming rocket or mortar and determine if it is headed for a major population center. If an urban area is threatened, interceptors are fired to detonate in the air in close proximity to the missile. Projectiles not posing a threat are allowed to fall in empty fields. The system targets short-range rockets with a range between 2 miles and 45 miles; interceptors cost as much $100,000 apiece.
Created by Israel's Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, Iron Dome has enjoyed strong U.S. technological and financial support.
Throughout its history, the U.S. has provided more than $700 million to help Israel cover costs for batteries, interceptors, production costs and maintenance, the Congressional Research Service said. The total already appeared set to climb above $1 billion after Senate appropriators doubled the Obama administration's request for Iron Dome funding for fiscal 2015. Now it seems likely to rise even
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/01/senate-approves-funding-for-israels-iron-dome-defense-system/
3)
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) received unanimous consent from his colleagues Friday morning when he asked them to consider approving the measure, The Hill reported. An attempt one day earlier by the Senate to approve funding for the system had failed.
Friday evening the House of Representatives also overwhelmingly passed the additional funding by a vote of 395-8. The packagewill put nearly a quarter of a billion dollars towards Israel’s missile defense system, which is jointly built by US defense giant Raytheon, as the country continues its campaign against Hamas in Gaza.
“They’re running out of Iron Dome missiles to protect themselves,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) said at the hearing, according to The Hill. “We are with you. Here are the missiles.”
“We are with the Israelis, because if they don’t have the Iron Dome, they can’t defend themselves,” added Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona).
John Kerry, the US secretary of state, said: “The United States condemns in the strongest possible terms today’s attack, which led to the killing of two Israeli soldiers and the apparent abduction of another. It was an outrageous violation of the ceasefire negotiated over the past several days, and of the assurances given to the United States and the United Nations.” Kerry also said Hamas must “immediately and unconditionally” release the Israeli soldier in their custody.
http://rt.com/usa/177404-senate-support-iron-dome-israel/
Let me know if you need anymore
We understand how personal this conflict is for you, and we all hope for your and your loved ones' safety. However, your continued sense of entitlement regarding the role of the United States in defense of Israel in your posts along with your criticism of how the United States is either not doing enough or how the United States had little to do with Israel's security is becoming old real fast.
You can hope for security without continuing to bite the hand that has been most responsible for your nation's security.
Absolutely 100% spot on. It really gets tiresome
And then the whole recent ceasefire(s) have been a disaster, from leaving out the PA/Egypt and just expecting Israel to go along with whatever Hamas/Turkey/Qatar demanded. And now forcing Israel into a ceasefire only to have it backfire when a soldier is kidnapped.
Don't think the US needs to back Israel unconditionally but they are trying some form of tough live which won't working
Please enlighten us what should have been done different. When you do so, try to frame with the actual constraints (both legally and politically) put in place by the Senate and the House. Don't give me the talking point BS that ignores actual facts please.
I suspect you are right based on one Israeli military expert's statement that I read (can't remember where) that by far the main cost of the system is the stocking and re-stocking of the spent missiles at 100k per pop, and clearly the US is funding the vast majority of that cost.
But the US got the technology of the system in return, tech that belonged solely to the IDF. I have no idea what's that worth, do you? It has no relevance to US security at home given the US's physical isolation from immediate threats, but so long as the US continues to have military bases spanning the globe I presume it's of interest for use for protecting those bases from local threats.
Does not get much more "Majority" then that.
What you should be is appreciative of the fact that this admin is the one who decided to fund those eight.
You can't even call this a point of view due to the fact it is so buried in delusional logic and rational. You seem to love to throw out talking points without ANY kind of substance, how about illustrating all of us how this admins policies are leading to the "dissolution of the Jewish State"? Not more TP crap, but actual validated substance.
Here's what I found from warontherocks.com:
"According to the Senate Armed Services Committee report, U.S. military non-personnel costs in South Korea totaled about $1.1 billion in 2012, while Korean payments totaled $765 million."
The ROK pays the US annually as part of the "burden sharing" agreement between the two countries.
There's quite a bit of editorializing in the body of the article, but I hope the above answers BlueLou's question.
US military expenditure in South Korea - ( New Window )
" If Obama redeployed the troops presently stationed in the peninsula, the U.S. could save an estimated $100 million per month excluding the cost of two annual exercises, deployment of thousands of reservists from mainland, mandatory maintenance and service of weapons systems. This projected figure was calculated based on 28,500 service members’ allotted overseas finances (Overseas Housing Allowance, Hazardous Duty Pay, Cost of Living Allowance, and Assignment Incentive Pay) in South Korea."
If the numbers and my math are correct, the US is spending $2.3 billion a year between non-personnel and personnel costs in South Korea.
A bit of more haphazard research tells me the US gave about $2.8 billion to Israel in 2010 in the form of military aid.
Does that even sound possible?
I know, It just amazes me how no matter the situation it gets turned into ridiculous talking points and silly memes by many people just so they can bitch about one political party or the other.
Don't shoot the messenger. Just doing a bit of research for BlueLou. He asked. ;)
BTW: I spend six months of the year in the ROK, teaching. I'm fully aware of why we're there.
Netanyahu to US: Don't second guess me on Hamas
WASHINGTON (AP) — Following the quick collapse of the cease-fire in Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the White House not to force a truce with Palestinian militants on Israel.
Sources familiar with conversations between Netanyahu and senior U.S. officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry, say the Israeli leader advised the Obama administration "not to ever second guess me again" on the matter. The officials also said Netanyahu said he should be "trusted" on the issue and about the unwillingness of Hamas to enter into and follow through on cease-fire talks.
The Obama administration on Friday condemned "outrageous" violations of an internationally brokered Gaza cease-fire by Palestinian militants and called the apparent abduction of an Israeli soldier a "barbaric" action.
The strong reaction came as top Israeli officials questioned the effort to forge the truce, accusing the U.S. and the United Nations of being naive in assuming the radical Hamas movement would adhere with its terms. The officials also blamed the Gulf state of Qatar for not forcing the militants to comply.
Link - ( New Window )
It's one thing to acknowledge there are 2 points of view, it's something else entirely to make a case for either point.You asked me to marry myself to a position contrary to yours, make the case and prove it, which was never my intent, rather simply to point out your view is not universally held, particularly in Israel. Regardless of evidence to the contrary,Illustrated by the above quotes from Netanyahu.
Also, don't make comments about "Talking points" when little or nothing I posted is being pushed by either side.I certainly don't see the convo between Netanyahu and Obama posted in mainstream media, let alone in republican talking points.Your comments imply I belong to one party or the other, or support their cause, or get my info from mainstream media replete with talking points. I would suggest when reading my posts, read what it says, not what you think it implies,as I am generally content, at least when posting source material to put it out there and let facts speak for themselves.I get my info from multiple sources, then form my own opinions.If there is some crossover with what someone else is spewing, please, don't bellittle it by labeling it as talking point, especially when you promote a party line yourself.You are as shrill as anyone else, don't kid yourself.
For the sake of clarity I'll say I don't like the current administration, or it's policies, or how it handles foreign affairs, and that it's made a bungle of things.I also felt the same way about the last administration and their policies.
My initial post was to put up the conversation between the Israeli prime minister, and the Us president ( for the simple reason I DIDN'T see it in anyone talking point or in the mainstream media) that demanded a ceasefire on Hamas's terms, and I still see it as a major policy shift from the position the Us has held regarding Israel for the past 47 years. I'm sorry, but I think that's noteworthy and not particularly common knowledge.I thought, and still do think it's something that merits attention, and something that may take some time to digest. Sorry if I, recently banned messenger, leaves a bad taste in the mouth, thereby obfuscating what I was trying to say.That I don't like this administration is an aside, and was not the point.We can debate the merits of a shift in position by the US and for all you know, I may well support it.Don't assume.
montana are you being disingenuous?
montanagiant : 12:59 pm : link : reply
No biggie, but you and Ronnie seem awfully bugged by my criticism of Kerry and lack of "appreciation" for all the money the US spends supporting the Israeli defense budget. So I was curious what actual dollar amount and % of S. Korea's defense budget the US supports, just as a counterpoint to Ronnie's bitch, that you echo.
And really? The US armed "presence in S. Korea goes much further then just aiding the ROK."
But the US support of Israel doesn't "go much farther than aiding the IDF?" Really?
How quickly one forgets that Israel took out Syria's secret nuclear facility, one which ironically was modeled after and built with the help of none other than North Korea...
According to the CIA, the unit was built with North Korean assistance and was modeled on one used by North Korea to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons.
(link below)
Certainly one of the biggest modern threats to US security is that nuclear weapons might end up in the hands of terrorists?
Israel’s Airstrike on Syria’s Reactor - ( New Window )
Lastly I never claimed to have developed that level of Ki and control over it.
That was my (South Korean) master, whose baby brother was one of the ROK marines top hand fighting teachers, just to bring this full circle.
Nice to see you're still concerned about issues you know so little about.
80 year old father-in-law could kick my ass, no sweat. Biceps like baseballs.
Quote:
Has not one ting to do with what we assist Israel with. We are not cutting funding to Israel and moving it there, or having to make a decision of one or the other. Our presence in S. Korea goes much further then just aiding the ROK.
Don't shoot the messenger. Just doing a bit of research for BlueLou. He asked. ;)
BTW: I spend six months of the year in the ROK, teaching. I'm fully aware of why we're there.
My post was not addressing your post, it was for those that brought it up as some kind of argument regarding Israel
montana are you being disingenuous?
No, I'm pointing out that S Korea has zero bearing on Israel. And it's not that I'm bugged about your opinion, I am bugged by the habit of not giving credit where it is due.
Quote:
What does it matter what we spend in S. Korea?
montanagiant : 12:59 pm : link : reply
No biggie, but you and Ronnie seem awfully bugged by my criticism of Kerry and lack of "appreciation" for all the money the US spends supporting the Israeli defense budget. So I was curious what actual dollar amount and % of S. Korea's defense budget the US supports, just as a counterpoint to Ronnie's bitch, that you echo.
And really? The US armed "presence in S. Korea goes much further then just aiding the ROK."
But the US support of Israel doesn't "go much farther than aiding the IDF?" Really?
How quickly one forgets that Israel took out Syria's secret nuclear facility, one which ironically was modeled after and built with the help of none other than North Korea...
Quote:
On September 6, 2007, in a surprise dawn attack, seven Israeli warplanes destroyed an industrial facility near al-Kibar, Syria, later identified by the CIA as a nearly completed nuclear reactor secretly under construction since 2001.[1]
According to the CIA, the unit was built with North Korean assistance and was modeled on one used by North Korea to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons.
(link below)
Certainly one of the biggest modern threats to US security is that nuclear weapons might end up in the hands of terrorists? Israel’s Airstrike on Syria’s Reactor - ( New Window )
It's one thing to acknowledge there are 2 points of view, it's something else entirely to make a case for either point.You asked me to marry myself to a position contrary to yours, make the case and prove it, which was never my intent, rather simply to point out your view is not universally held, particularly in Israel. Regardless of evidence to the contrary,Illustrated by the above quotes from Netanyahu.
Also, don't make comments about "Talking points" when little or nothing I posted is being pushed by either side.I certainly don't see the convo between Netanyahu and Obama posted in mainstream media, let alone in republican talking points.Your comments imply I belong to one party or the other, or support their cause, or get my info from mainstream media replete with talking points. I would suggest when reading my posts, read what it says, not what you think it implies,as I am generally content, at least when posting source material to put it out there and let facts speak for themselves.I get my info from multiple sources, then form my own opinions.If there is some crossover with what someone else is spewing, please, don't bellittle it by labeling it as talking point, especially when you promote a party line yourself.You are as shrill as anyone else, don't kid yourself.
For the sake of clarity I'll say I don't like the current administration, or it's policies, or how it handles foreign affairs, and that it's made a bungle of things.I also felt the same way about the last administration and their policies.
My initial post was to put up the conversation between the Israeli prime minister, and the Us president ( for the simple reason I DIDN'T see it in anyone talking point or in the mainstream media) that demanded a ceasefire on Hamas's terms, and I still see it as a major policy shift from the position the Us has held regarding Israel for the past 47 years. I'm sorry, but I think that's noteworthy and not particularly common knowledge.I thought, and still do think it's something that merits attention, and something that may take some time to digest. Sorry if I, recently banned messenger, leaves a bad taste in the mouth, thereby obfuscating what I was trying to say.That I don't like this administration is an aside, and was not the point.We can debate the merits of a shift in position by the U
S and for all you know, I may well support it.Don't assume.
Let's try it again. So you didn't state this admin was trying to dissolve the State of Israel???
You might want to read again what you wrote, because that was exactly what you claimed. Now your back crawling and trying to spin it as an opinion after the fact.. Maybe it's better we just deal with the facts and not slanted/ biased dies genius opinions.
Though we're not in BlueLou's boat, we (well, I do) sit on edge once in a while over there.
ROK and DPRK still technically at war and all that.
And unless you can tell me that Israel provides the United States a strategic base for power projection like S. Korea and Japan, I think you're comparing apples to oranges. But don't let the facts distract you from having any sense of objectivity to how our national security interests work.
Quote:
Keep telling yourself there is no other "way of looking at it" which is all I said, I didn't say it was a fact, simply pointed out there are other perceptions,which you don't seem to recognize.
It's one thing to acknowledge there are 2 points of view, it's something else entirely to make a case for either point.You asked me to marry myself to a position contrary to yours, make the case and prove it, which was never my intent, rather simply to point out your view is not universally held, particularly in Israel. Regardless of evidence to the contrary,Illustrated by the above quotes from Netanyahu.
Also, don't make comments about "Talking points" when little or nothing I posted is being pushed by either side.I certainly don't see the convo between Netanyahu and Obama posted in mainstream media, let alone in republican talking points.Your comments imply I belong to one party or the other, or support their cause, or get my info from mainstream media replete with talking points. I would suggest when reading my posts, read what it says, not what you think it implies,as I am generally content, at least when posting source material to put it out there and let facts speak for themselves.I get my info from multiple sources, then form my own opinions.If there is some crossover with what someone else is spewing, please, don't bellittle it by labeling it as talking point, especially when you promote a party line yourself.You are as shrill as anyone else, don't kid yourself.
For the sake of clarity I'll say I don't like the current administration, or it's policies, or how it handles foreign affairs, and that it's made a bungle of things.I also felt the same way about the last administration and their policies.
My initial post was to put up the conversation between the Israeli prime minister, and the Us president ( for the simple reason I DIDN'T see it in anyone talking point or in the mainstream media) that demanded a ceasefire on Hamas's terms, and I still see it as a major policy shift from the position the Us has held regarding Israel for the past 47 years. I'm sorry, but I think that's noteworthy and not particularly common knowledge.I thought, and still do think it's something that merits attention, and something that may take some time to digest. Sorry if I, recently banned messenger, leaves a bad taste in the mouth, thereby obfuscating what I was trying to say.That I don't like this administration is an aside, and was not the point.We can debate the merits of a shift in position by the U
S and for all you know, I may well support it.Don't assume.
Let's try it again. So you didn't state this admin was trying to dissolve the State of Israel???
You might want to read again what you wrote, because that was exactly what you claimed. Now your back crawling and trying to spin it as an opinion after the fact.. Maybe it's better we just deal with the facts and not slanted/ biased dies genius opinions.
Thats is correct sir. I did NOT say this administration is trying to dissolve the state of IsraeL.I know what I wrote, and if you go back and read it, I said quite clearly that it was "another way to look at it", the point being that some do, Israelis in particular and they don't appreciate it.Again, I never said I looked at it that way.
What I said was that his actions are viewed by many as possibly leading to it. It's a pretty simple concept, dude, it's not that hard to follow.If you are going to tell me you have a crystal ball and can assure us all that accepting peace on Hamas terms and returning to the 67 borders could never result in the destruction of Israel, particularly by an organization that still calls for it's destruction in it's founding charter, then your just batshit nuts.
All I'm saying is some people looking at the situation aren't nearly as overwhelmed with some sort of sense of gratitude that you feel Israel owes the U.S. (your espoused view) as much as they feel dread and resentment and abandonment at the realization that the US president tried to DICTATE terms, flat out,to Netanyahu, along lines that favored Hamas and reversed 47 years of US policy.
If you continue to play dumb like you don't understand the distinction between the 2 points of view, and that the second is widely held would indicate to me. You are, as another poster said, disingenuous.
Some nice garlic Hamas with pita bread.. Mmmmmm..
I don't know. I'm not speaking for montana here, but there is a huge gulf between Israelis owing the U.S. "some sort of gratitude" and Israelis (and those associated with Israel) bitching about the U.S. not doing enough (or fucking up) for them. I don't think montana is saying that Israel should show gratitude as much as Israel shouldn't be bitching about the help they are getting because they don't think it's enough or not the right kind. The U.S. still has to navigate through the complex geopolitical world that goes beyond the borders of Israel. And while extremely important to the regional security, the situation in Israel is just one of many that the U.S. has to tread cautiously around.
Some nice garlic Hamas with pita bread.. Mmmmmm..
What a dip
Quote:
All I'm saying is some people looking at the situation aren't nearly as overwhelmed with some sort of sense of gratitude that you feel Israel owes the U.S. (your espoused view) as much as they feel dread and resentment and abandonment at the realization that the US president tried to DICTATE terms, flat out,to Netanyahu, along lines that favored Hamas and reversed 47 years of US policy.
I don't know. I'm not speaking for montana here, but there is a huge gulf between Israelis owing the U.S. "some sort of gratitude" and Israelis (and those associated with Israel) bitching about the U.S. not doing enough (or fucking up) for them. I don't think montana is saying that Israel should show gratitude as much as Israel shouldn't be bitching about the help they are getting because they don't think it's enough or not the right kind. The U.S. still has to navigate through the complex geopolitical world that goes beyond the borders of Israel. And while extremely important to the regional security, the situation in Israel is just one of many that the U.S. has to tread cautiously around.
What I'm saying is we need to think about what we, the US are doing, we need ti understand our ally Israel, for all it's warts, has it's own perspective, and it's own considerations, and right now they feel threatened, rightfully so, and if we offset the benefits of any aid we send then by forcing them to accept terms that compromise their integrity, including their territorial integrity ( because that's exactly what the terms of Kerry's proposal did) then many will view it as we aren't really doing them any favors, And I have to say at this point I'm inclined to agree.Which is why they are asking us to just leave them the fuck alone, but please keep sending the bullets.
Though we're not in BlueLou's boat, we (well, I do) sit on edge once in a while over there.
ROK and DPRK still technically at war and all that.
Yeah through my wife i have some ties there. My Father-in-law ran military security there during the 80's. Wife and her 2 sisters taught English there for 3 years.
Quote:
In comment 11790901 Great White Ghost said:
Quote:
Keep telling yourself there is no other "way of looking at it" which is all I said, I didn't say it was a fact, simply pointed out there are other perceptions,which you don't seem to recognize.
It's one thing to acknowledge there are 2 points of view, it's something else entirely to make a case for either point.You asked me to marry myself to a position contrary to yours, make the case and prove it, which was never my intent, rather simply to point out your view is not universally held, particularly in Israel. Regardless of evidence to the contrary,Illustrated by the above quotes from Netanyahu.
Also, don't make comments about "Talking points" when little or nothing I posted is being pushed by either side.I certainly don't see the convo between Netanyahu and Obama posted in mainstream media, let alone in republican talking points.Your comments imply I belong to one party or the other, or support their cause, or get my info from mainstream media replete with talking points. I would suggest when reading my posts, read what it says, not what you think it implies,as I am generally content, at least when posting source material to put it out there and let facts speak for themselves.I get my info from multiple sources, then form my own opinions.If there is some crossover with what someone else is spewing, please, don't bellittle it by labeling it as talking point, especially when you promote a party line yourself.You are as shrill as anyone else, don't kid yourself.
For the sake of clarity I'll say I don't like the current administration, or it's policies, or how it handles foreign affairs, and that it's made a bungle of things.I also felt the same way about the last administration and their policies.
My initial post was to put up the conversation between the Israeli prime minister, and the Us president ( for the simple reason I DIDN'T see it in anyone talking point or in the mainstream media) that demanded a ceasefire on Hamas's terms, and I still see it as a major policy shift from the position the Us has held regarding Israel for the past 47 years. I'm sorry, but I think that's noteworthy and not particularly common knowledge.I thought, and still do think it's something that merits attention, and something that may take some time to digest. Sorry if I, recently banned messenger, leaves a bad taste in the mouth, thereby obfuscating what I was trying to say.That I don't like this administration is an aside, and was not the point.We can debate the merits of a shift in position by the U
S and for all you know, I may well support it.Don't assume.
Let's try it again. So you didn't state this admin was trying to dissolve the State of Israel???
You might want to read again what you wrote, because that was exactly what you claimed. Now your back crawling and trying to spin it as an opinion after the fact.. Maybe it's better we just deal with the facts and not slanted/ biased dies genius opinions.
Thats is correct sir. I did NOT say this administration is trying to dissolve the state of IsraeL.I know what I wrote, and if you go back and read it, I said quite clearly that it was "another way to look at it", the point being that some do, Israelis in particular and they don't appreciate it.Again, I never said I looked at it that way.
What I said was that his actions are viewed by many as possibly leading to it. It's a pretty simple concept, dude, it's not that hard to follow.If you are going to tell me you have a crystal ball and can assure us all that accepting peace on Hamas terms and returning to the 67 borders could never result in the destruction of Israel, particularly by an organization that still calls for it's destruction in it's founding charter, then your just batshit nuts.
All I'm saying is some people looking at the situation aren't nearly as overwhelmed with some sort of sense of gratitude that you feel Israel owes the U.S. (your espoused view) as much as they feel dread and resentment and abandonment at the realization that the US president tried to DICTATE terms, flat out,to Netanyahu, along lines that favored Hamas and reversed 47 years of US policy.
If you continue to play dumb like you don't understand the distinction between the 2 points of view, and that the second is widely held would indicate to me. You are, as another poster said, disingenuous.
lol...Ok, this is the third different spin you have put on your claim so i will once again re-frame the question using your newest excuse for what you wrote:
How can you have the perception that this admin's policies are working towards dissolving the Israel State given the fact that they will have shortly put 1 billion into the "Iron Dome" defense system that specifically protects the "Jewish State"?
Look the issue here is that your dislike of the admin is causing you to make ridiculous over-the-top claims that completely ignore actual facts. Your using a delicate situation for your own slanted political arguments, which ironically if it was not for their funding decisions towards Israel, that dissolving of the Israel state you throw around had a much better chance if happening.
Quote:
All I'm saying is some people looking at the situation aren't nearly as overwhelmed with some sort of sense of gratitude that you feel Israel owes the U.S. (your espoused view) as much as they feel dread and resentment and abandonment at the realization that the US president tried to DICTATE terms, flat out,to Netanyahu, along lines that favored Hamas and reversed 47 years of US policy.
I don't know. I'm not speaking for montana here, but there is a huge gulf between Israelis owing the U.S. "some sort of gratitude" and Israelis (and those associated with Israel) bitching about the U.S. not doing enough (or fucking up) for them. I don't think montana is saying that Israel should show gratitude as much as Israel shouldn't be bitching about the help they are getting because they don't think it's enough or not the right kind. The U.S. still has to navigate through the complex geopolitical world that goes beyond the borders of Israel. And while extremely important to the regional security, the situation in Israel is just one of many that the U.S. has to tread cautiously around.
BINGO!!!! but they knew that already, it just did not help their argument to say that.