In a speech today, John McCain was trying to criticize Obama for being naive on the Middle East. What's naive is that John McCain apparently thinks he his running to become the President of Israel as opposed to the United States.
Here is what he said:
"The threats to Israel's security are large and growing, and America's commitment must grow as well," McCain said. "I am committed to making certain Israel maintains its qualitative military edge." "Iran is the principle threat to Israel"
That's great and everything but I want to know is who is the principle threat to the United States, not Israel. This is a speech an Israeli candidate should be making. I think what he means is that our lopsided support of Israel, a rich nation in its own right, is the biggest threat facing the United States.
Currently Israel is the largest recipient of foreign aid and apparently that isn't enough. They are now in the process of trying to extort an additional 600 Million dollars from the United States bringing their aid package up to 3 Billion dollars next year. I guess the weak dollar is taking a toll on Israel as well. To put that into perspective, the impoverished Palestinian territory receives about 75 Million dollars per year and their neighbor Lebanon receives 142 Million in aid.
So, who would you rather vote for, a guy who thinks protecting Israel is more important than protecting America or the guy who wants to persuade Iran to leave Israel alone? McCain can try to ignore and threaten Iran as much as he wants but a lot of good that did Bush. When Bush came into office Iran was not developing Nuclear weapons, it wasn't until after he threatened Iran and N. Korea did both of those countries start up or renew their nuclear programs. Does he really think that Iran is afraid of the U.S. or afraid of an attack by the U.S.? We couldn't invade Iran if we wanted to. Our forces are spread too think and Iran is twice the size of Iraq. If we can't win in Iraq, how can we be expected to win in both Iran and Iraq? Any tough talk or threats made by the Bush, McCain or the U.S. would be laughed at by Iran as they know we simply couldn’t deliver. No one here or in the Security Council will authorize war with Iran after our credibility is in question after crying wolf in Iraq. That's why Obama voted against labeling Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization; he wasn't going to give the administration ammunition to invade yet another country which had not attacked us. I'm not saying that Ahmadinejad isn't a little cookey, he is, that's why threatening him won't work, he isn't afraid of dying and thinks that when he does it will be God's will and he will get 72 virgins in heaven. In other words, threatening him isn't a way to keep us out of a war or to get him to stop calling Jews names.
But I guess money talks, imagine how much Exxon could make if we went to war with Iran?
3 comments:
Dammit, you're going to make me defend him....
McCain recognizes that Israel is our only strong ally in an area full of countries that don't like us. Therefore, by keeping them strong, we protect ourself.
Also, I still haven't figured out how we profit by getting into fights in the middle east. I always figured it gave OPEC reason to make more bank at all our expenses.
How is that again?
What kind of ally spies on you and sinks your warships and then demands more money even though they have one of the highest GDPs in the middle east? And this is where i disagree with the backwards philosophy of giving Israel, who many see as a terrorist state, more money than all mid east countries combined makes the rest of the world think we support Israels 3 major land grabs and their bulldozing of Palestinian houses because they are related to someone Israel calls a Terrorist and thus dislocating thousands of families which end up in refugee camps in places like Syria which are breeding grounds for terrorists. Since it's US money that buys Israel their bombs and their bulldozers these terrorists believe that if they can kill the person feeding the beast, the beast will die. Isreal is the beast, they incite terrorism, not eliminate it. Im not saying they don't have a right to exist but the UN never gave them large portions of land which they now occupy and have kicked out Palestinians. They took that land and we shouldn't fund their occupation, this is why the people in the middle east hate us.
You don't get the concept of war profits?
Look at Exxon's stock prices in 2003, one month before the war it was trading at $33.44 per share and gasoline was about $1.50 per gallon. Today their stock closed at $87.81, a 162 % increase, I pay $4.40 for Gasoline. Don't try to say that Chinas demand has quadrupled over the last 5 years because it isn't the case.
Conoco Phillips, another former TX constituent of George Bush saw its stock price go from $24 per share in 2003 to $92.95, a 284% increase.
Halliburton, Another ex TX constituent and former company of Dick Cheney, saw its stock go from $19.19, it closed today at $48.05, a 150% increase.
Not to mention that when the US goes to war it borrows money from the Federal Reserve, the Federal Reserve charges us interest. The Federal Reserve and the people who run it profit from our wars. Private banks elect their own members to the Board of Directors to their regional Reserve banks.
"There are only two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt."- John Adams
The situation with Israel has at least one parallel with Iraq: We are invested in the situation and we have to find the best solution with what we have.
I did propose a solution that would solve the whole Israeli situation. We can either kill all the Palestinians or kill all the Jews. Strangely, I don't think either will happen. Given that fact, do you have any solution to the mess? Because Israel will continue to fight and do what they feel is necessary to survive and the Palestinian terrorists will continue trying to blow them up. In this case, until a solution presents itself, we've got to dance with the one that brung us.
As for war profits:
Of course the companies involved in oil, or anything involving war material is going to profit when we're engaged in war. That same war profiteering that you love to decry was also what pulled us out of the Great Depression. Also, if you hadn't noticed, the price for oil has spiked insanely since 9/11. And if any company dealing with oil continues to make the same margin on something that quadruples in price, then their profits WILL go up. And that's what will make us stronger and fuel research into all those alternative fuels you'd like to see.
As for debt, far be it for me to disagree with Mr Adams. However, he did believe in a limited government, with defense and war being one of the legitimate functions. The problem is that the government spends on every other damn thing out there. Perhaps if we start cutting all of that crap the fed shouldn't be doing (no matter how it can be "justified"), then we wouldn't have the excessive debt we have now.
Post a Comment