U.S. Aid to Israel

$6 billion a year. Does this make our hands dirty as well?

Under the Arms Export Control Act the U.S. can only supply weapons that are used “for legitimate self defense”. The US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country “which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights”. The Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to allow inspections of its nuclear facilities. All three of these laws are currently being broken with aid to Israel. Israel is not required to account for the specific purchases that the aid is being used for; it can be spent on anything ? including expansion of colonial settlement projects.

This entry was posted in News on by .

About Andy

Gay Hoosier Taurus INFJ ex-playwright pianist gymbunny published author in San Francisco. Tw · Fb

12 thoughts on “U.S. Aid to Israel

  1. Jay

    ?does this make our hands dirty as well?? of course it does. every bullet that kills an innocent civilians, man, woman or child is paid for by you and me. we also pay for the bulldozer razing of palestinian homes, like the one that KILLED american peace activist rachel corrie. every missile fired against a SUSPECT (remember there’s no due process in israel; they claim to be at war, hence they target and neutralise at will) is paid for by you and me. and if it’s war allowing this, then why is the response of the palestinians terrorism and not an act of war or fight for freedom? this is how every american tax-payer also nears responsibility for 11 september 2001. we pay for the ability of the israeli armed forces to enforce the occupation of palestine along with the 50,000 american fckers who live in settlements in occupied land because the bloody buggery bible says it belongs to them. aarrrgghh!

    COMMENT:
    civilians=civilian
    nears=bears

  2. Andy

    I keep reading and re-reading the history of this conflict and I just can’t wrap my head around it. It seems so stupid and wasteful. Maybe Arafat and Sharon are both nutcases. The public discourse in this country always occluded by the spectre of anti-Semiticism (instead of the more accurate anti-Sharon). As a near agnostic I have trouble buying what the ancient texts say. I just find it curious that whenever you hear of the U.S. not signing something or attending something – that Israel is right there with us. The ugly American says: okay – you know what – you guys have been in conflict for decades and obviously aren’t willing to let of your piety or pride to forward peace so you just go blow yourselves up to heaven/hell. Then I read how much aid we give to Israel and that infuriates me even more – and the fact that they’re breaking treaties just like we do/are. Violence begets violence. Always has always will. It has always required the moving beyond grief and pain to assemble peace. Nobody said peace was easy but people equate it with cowardice.

  3. flounder

    “of course it does. every bullet that kills an innocent civilians, man, woman or child is paid for by you and me….”

    Such typical liberal self-flagellation. This is the same kind of ignorance and truth distortions that leads people to accuse jews throughout time as being “Christ-killers”.

  4. Andy

    We give billions of dollars in aid to Israel every year. My main argument is who the hell are we to be mediators at the table when we obviously can’t be objective participants.

  5. Jay

    flounder: i disagree with you completely and absolutely. and there’s not even a hint of self-flagellation taking place here, much less a distortion of any fact. this is about calling a spade a spade. the history of this conflict doesn’t even inform the parties involved in it, so the only solution is to face the realities of the present to build a peaceful future. fact: the palestinians ARE THERE and they have a right to their olive trees. the jews are also there with similar rights (yet i’ll be damned if they are entitled to a state/nation by virtue of a NON-EXISTENT deity). even the syrians have already recognised the right of israel to exist, so what’s stopping the process? better accept that it’s not the HOMICIDE-bombings, not even the disproportionate and virtue-free response of the israelis, because just like we have extremists in this country who kill and bomb (oklahoma, anyone?) so will there “always” be someone who believes that palestine should extend from “the river” to “the sea” (the river jordan/the med sea) and another who believes medinat israel should not even allow an arab footprint within its borders… so yes, back to the issue of our support as allowing israel to continue building that shameful wall, building illegal settlements, razing the homes and villages of innocent civilians and the like.

  6. flounder

    Putting aside your absolute proclamation of a non-existant diety for a moment, you seem to have forgotten the most important reason the U.S. provides support to Israel: it is the only democracy in the region. If I have blood on my hands for helping a democratic country protect itself from terrorist thugs, then I can sleep well. I just find it so laughable that liberals are now accusing Bush of not being hard enough on terrorists pre-9/11. More hypocrisy from the left.

    By the way, the article referenced above is so ridiculously one-sided and pro-palestinian that yes, it is a distortion of the truth.

  7. Jay

    hey flounder and all– i disagree with you that i’ve forgotten anything and that israel being a “democracy” is the most important reason we pay for the country’s MILITARY. and i will offer my opinion on the reasons why we do so another time. while i CONDEMN and DEPLORE terrorism as much as you might or anybody else, i am also aware that we are still talking about actions taken against an occupying country in what amounts to be a WAR, which is the claim of israelis as they proceed with their assassinations strategy, rather than a capture, arraignment and trial one, you know due process. and relative to anything being one-sided, i respectfully inform you that you are certainly not one to recognise such fact being guilty of it yourself, post after post.

  8. flounder

    “…while i CONDEMN and DEPLORE terrorism as much as you might or anybody else, i am also aware that we are still talking about actions taken against an occupying country in what amounts to be a WAR, which is the claim of israelis as they proceed with their assassinations strategy, rather than a capture, arraignment and trial one, you know due process.”

    Due process for terrorists thugs? Nope, doesn’t work as we witnessed first-hand from Clinton’s failed attempts to treat al-qaeda as a law enforcement issue.

    “..and relative to anything being one-sided, i respectfully inform you that you are certainly not one to recognise such fact being guilty of it yourself, post after post.”

    Look, my posts aren’t being published in some rag attempting to pass itself off as the truth. They are only my opinions, whether you consider them one-sided or not.

  9. Jay

    the truth is the truth and nothing can “pass as if”— in that case it wouldn’t be the truth and this is exactly why i challenge your opinions if i notice they are wrong. a “one-sided” opinion is wrong and that fact that you may espouse it doesn’t mean that it’s not to be challenged. you shouldn’t hold an opinion on any subject without objective consideration of all possible arguments and facts. what i am trying to tell you here is to think, study, listen, read, analyse and verify before you formulate an opinion and certainly before you dare express it as if it were self-evident truth!

  10. Jay

    my use of “non-existent deity” is not a proclamation of any kind. note however, that any belief in a deity would be the “proclamation” to be put aside… see, non-existence does not require proof, while extraordinary claims do indeed require extraordinary evidence… so a statement recognising the non-existence of god is indeed the most casual, accurate, reasonable, actual and real one any human alive can make, period. anything esle is indeed a matter of belief, opinion and faith, which is matter for fiction and myth.

  11. flounder

    “the truth is the truth and nothing can “pass as if”— in that case it wouldn’t be the truth and this is exactly why i challenge your opinions if i notice they are wrong. a “one-sided” opinion is wrong and that fact that you may espouse it doesn’t mean that it’s not to be challenged. you shouldn’t hold an opinion on any subject without objective consideration of all possible arguments and facts. what i am trying to tell you here is to think, study, listen, read, analyse and verify before you formulate an opinion and certainly before you dare express it as if it were self-evident truth!”

    Is this an example of what you are referring to as “progressive” thought? You know, that enlightened, educated, objective and even superior philosophy that you adhere to? lol.

  12. flounder

    “my use of “non-existent deity” is not a proclamation of any kind. note however, that any belief in a deity would be the “proclamation” to be put aside… see, non-existence does not require proof, while extraordinary claims do indeed require extraordinary evidence… so a statement recognising the non-existence of god is indeed the most casual, accurate, reasonable, actual and real one any human alive can make, period. anything esle is indeed a matter of belief, opinion and faith, which is matter for fiction and myth.”

    God is love, Jay.

Comments are closed.