When will Americans wake up to the costs of the special relationship? When the media and politicians begin to speak about the obvious, that's when. From Bruce Riedel at the Daily Beast, on the Al Qaeda attack in Afghanistan a year ago that killed 7 CIA officers and a Jordanian intelligence officer:
According to what his wife later told journalists in Jordan, [Humam Khalil Abu Mulal al] Balawi had been deeply affected by Operation Cast Lead, Israel's military campaign in Gaza during the winter of 2008-2009, and had tried to go to Gaza from Jordan to join Hamas. Unable to get to Gaza, Balawi set out on a new mission: to infiltrate the Jordanian intelligence agency, which he saw as a tool of U.S. and Israeli interests in the region, making his way from Jordan to Pakistan and telling the Jordanians that he had information on the whereabouts of al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman Zawahiri. In reality, however, Balawi was a triple agent, still working for al Qaeda.
C’mon, Phil. Do you really think Al-Qaeda attacked US troops in Afghanistan because of Israel? Ya think maybe the fact that the US is still there had something to do with it?
im just readin the articles hop
yes its multifactorial, but if you want to immunize the special relationship from a role in our disastrous occupations in the middle east, then i got a bridge i want to sell you, special end of the year price
Hophmi: Your question has no bearing on the Phil’s posting. Phil’s posting does not say that Al-Qaeda attacks US troops in Afghanistan because of Israel. This style of arguing is absolutely dishonest.
Phil,
The people who attacked the Munich Oympics were deeply affected by the fact that Israel existed.
That is the root cause. Your attempt to identify proximal causes is very fishy. There are always going to be people who are not happy anybody approves of Israel. Is that a reason for the US to sever ties with Israel?
The occupations of the US in the middle east are related to 9/11, not the special relationship with Israel. Clearly, any US president would have launched an attack on Afghanistan, whatever Israel’s advice was. As for Iraq, Israeli interests dictated a weakened Iraq but not one that could not stand up to Iran. The US chose another path because it naively believed it could democratize Iraq.
and who took the dictation?
It was a figure of speech that you have have misinterpreted.
Let me write more clearly:
It is in Israeli interests to see a weakened Iraq, but not so weak that it cannot stand to Iran. In addition, very few Israelis believed Iraq could become a successful democracy in a reasonable amount of time. However, these Israeli positions were not taken into account by the US.
The people who attacked the Munich Olympics were deeply affected by being driven at gunpoint from their land.
These would be the same people who Israel slaughtered in a brutal campaign of terrorism across Europe? Oh, them, and any other Palestinian who identified as such and was of political influence. Oh, and at least one Morroccan waiter. All murdered. By Israel. Is that who you are referring to as people who are deeply affected by Israel’s existence?
hophmi wrote:
“C’mon, Phil. Do you really think Al-Qaeda attacked US troops in Afghanistan because of Israel?”
Well I won’t speak for Phil but as for me, yes. Balawi was acting for Al-Qaeda. He attacked our CIA people which is close enough to “troops” for me. His wife, with no obvious nor even non-obvious reason to lie now says that attack was “because of Israel” and its actions during Cast Lead.
So what in the world it too subtle about this for you? Or is the operative principle that no matter how clear the truth of something is, if it reflects badly on Israel it is to be denied, no matter how ridiculously?