The US is totally under Israel's thumb

[Eki]

I think we've wandered off course somewhat. So back to the OP.

The point remains that the United States has never (as far as I know - please correct me with facts if I am... as I'm relying on my memory) upheld a resolution against Israel. Coming in a close second to the U.S.'s record of support would be England. But I don't think the U.S. has ever been on the opposite side of the table from Israel. That tells me that one of two things is true: either Israel has NEVER been in the wrong or the U.S. has allowed the tail to wag the dog for many, many years. Which one is it?

Exactly. The US should even once stand against Israel, if not for other reasons, then just to show who's the boss. Unless Israel is the boss and the US is their servant.

[Rollo]

Exactly. The US should even once stand against Israel, if not for other reasons, then just to show who's the boss. Unless Israel is the boss and the US is their servant.

No.

The United States is a sovereign nation and as such it has the prerogative to vote any way it wishes on any resolution, which it has done.

The link you've provided didn't give any evidence of coercion; so your claim is pretty well much baseless unless you can prove otherwise.

[Jag_Warrior]

Exactly. The US should even once stand against Israel, if not for other reasons, then just to show who's the boss. Unless Israel is the boss and the US is their servant.

The Israeli lobby makes the lobbyists from the NRA, big tobacco and big oil look like rank amateurs. The members of the U.S. congress who spend their days tripping over themselves to prove that they are loyal bootlickers for Israel include members of both major parties. No other lobbying group even comes CLOSE to that level of influence, IMO. Again, I invite people to read the Cranston Amendment. Now, tell me who else has a sweetheart deal like that? Hell, if I made a deal like that with a bank, we'd all go to jail! Pay me interest on an approved loan that has not been placed in my account yet - but I don't start paying interest on the loan until I take it? So, the bank would pay me interest on their money (until I take the loan), and once I take the loan, they're obligated to forever more continue to loan me at least enough money to make the interest payments? Yes! I want that deal!!!! Please!!!! I bet, magically, I'll never miss an interest payment either.

Several years ago, Pat Buchanan made comments that were less than supportive of U.S. policies that (overly) favored Israel. Like me, he is of the opinion that U.S. foreign policy should be based on that which benefits the citizens of the U.S. first, and the citizens of any other country second. As has happened with every other U.S. politician who didn't kowtow to Israel, Buchanan was instantly branded as a racist and an anti-Semite. I oppose radical Zionism just as I oppose most other political/social extremes. But to oppose Zionism translates to anti-Semitism in the eyes of those who hold the microphone. The message: tread lightly.

[Roamy]

Look we have to get real - Without our 100% support Israel is a glowing parking lot. Eki hates the jews I have problems with most muslims. This is not going to change. If we want to throw Israel under the bus can you just imagine the jews revolting in this country. I just can't believe no one likes my idea. We have to move them over here. Or maybe if you look at the big picture maybe that is the place we stockpile a tremendous amount of Nukes. Either way it ain't gonna change and this administration is the closest they will ever get to being dumped. Illegitimate building - what the hell is this. The house wasn't married when they fu____Ked the Pales. This world is a cesspool

[airshifter]

I think we've wandered off course somewhat. So back to the OP.

The point remains that the United States has never (as far as I know - please correct me with facts if I am... as I'm relying on my memory) upheld a resolution against Israel. Coming in a close second to the U.S.'s record of support would be England. But I don't think the U.S. has ever been on the opposite side of the table from Israel. That tells me that one of two things is true: either Israel has NEVER been in the wrong or the U.S. has allowed the tail to wag the dog for many, many years. Which one is it?

Not even close. The US has voted in favor of a great number of UN Security Council Resolutions that comdemn, deplore, insist, censure, etc., ect. the acts of Israel. As have virtually every Security Council member in the history of the council. Along with many other countries including the UK, Canada, Denmark, Norway, The USSR, Jordan, Syria there are times the US has abstained from votes that condemn the acts of Israel. If a person actually looks up the text of such Council meetings it includes notes from member countries that often clarify the reasons for abstaining.

In quite a few cases member countries abstain from a vote that they know will easily pass, simply for reasons of not backing the entire Resolution or a particular section. The US went on record a number of times, including most of the times they voted against Resolutions condemning Israel, due to the fact that the Security Council was writing a Resolution that would officially recognize a terrorist organisation (usually the PLO). The US made clear that it would not recognize, negotiate with, support, or otherwise be officially bothered with any organisation that supported terrorism, unless that organisation was the legal government of a country.

8 or 10 years ago I got tired of all the "Bully US uses the veto again" threads and arguments on the internet and actually researched the issue. Most of the Resolutions that the US used it's veto power against involved recognizing the PLO as if it were a legitimate government that represented a country. This in spite of the fact that they operated in a number of countries, and in spite of the fact that their charter essentially called for the complete destruction of Israel.


The Oslo Accords attempted to made some progress with the PLO, and they finally stated that they would recognize the legitimate right of Israel to exist. I don't think they ever managed to back this up in writing a new charter that was legit, and as usual they didn't keep their end of the deal.


While I can agree that the power of the lobbyists puts pressure on the US, it has never played lapdog to Israel as some suggest. And if a person actually reads the details of all the various Resolutions, no country has ever ignored the fact that Israel is not without fault.

[Bob Riebe]

Exactly. The US should even once stand against Israel, if not for other reasons, then just to show who's the boss. Unless Israel is the boss and the US is their servant.

The U.S. has no reason now, what so ever, to ever take stance against Irsrael.
They did in 1967, but thank God did not.

Muslim nations, have given the U.S. every reason to back Israel, and until they change, which will be when hell freezes, they are being treated as they deserve.

[Roamy]

The U.S. has no reason now, what so ever, to ever take stance against Irsrael.
They did in 1967, but thank God did not.

Muslim nations, have given the U.S. every reason to back Israel, and until they change, which will be when hell freezes, they are being treated as they deserve.

Amen to that !!!!!!

[Mark in Oshawa]

The Zionists are funny that way, that even there's a lot of dirt in the Middle East too, they insist on building their settlement specifically in Jerusalem. So you can expect anything from them, even insisting to build on your golf course if someone tells them that the God has promised it to them.

how Dare they have their capital in a City that Jews have live in for 1000's of years before Arabs came along...horrors, the next thing you will argue they shouldn't live in a treeless, waterless desert because they actually have the GALL to make a nation worth living in out of it.

There is a reason you get no respect on Israel Eki, you are unhinged, and you ignore history when it doesn't support your anti Zionist rants...

[Bob Riebe]

The Zionists are funny that way, that even there's a lot of dirt in the Middle East too, they insist on building their settlement specifically in Jerusalem. So you can expect anything from them, even insisting to build on your golf course if someone tells them that the God has promised it to them.

They, at least some, still have faith that they are God's chosen as the Bible says.
Is your quarrel actually with their faith?
Otherwise, it is theirs, as given to them, you cannot change that no matter what you do, so you are acting like a dog barking up a tree the squirrel long abandoned.

[Jag_Warrior]

Not even close. The US has voted in favor of a great number of UN Security Council Resolutions that comdemn, deplore, insist, censure, etc., ect. the acts of Israel. As have virtually every Security Council member in the history of the council. Along with many other countries including the UK, Canada, Denmark, Norway, The USSR, Jordan, Syria there are times the US has abstained from votes that condemn the acts of Israel. If a person actually looks up the text of such Council meetings it includes notes from member countries that often clarify the reasons for abstaining.


While I can agree that the power of the lobbyists puts pressure on the US, it has never played lapdog to Israel as some suggest. And if a person actually reads the details of all the various Resolutions, no country has ever ignored the fact that Israel is not without fault.

I took the time to try to quantify the U.S.'s voting record in the Security Council on this issue. To find a (truly) unbiased source is not easy - which I found odd. But for anyone who wants to take the raw numbers and do the leg work, the UN site does offer a huge amount of rather interesting data. UN database

I may have overstated the number of times that the U.S. has supported Israel in the UN. But to say that the U.S. has gone against Israel "a great number of times" also seems to be an overstatement. What I found was that up until 1972, the U.S. had seldom used its permanent member veto power. But after 1972, it became fairly common practice... and that was typically to shield Israel from proposed resolutions. That is not to qualify the legitimacy of those resolutions, only to say that when there was a veto, it was typically the U.S. that made the veto.

Like Buchanan (on this issue), my greater concern is for the U.S., not Israel, or ANY OTHER nation. An Israeli would probably see the other side of that coin and want what was best for Israel. But I'm not an Israeli. I'm an American. IMO, this is simply part of a larger issue, where politicians in the U.S. continue to demonstrate that they can be bought by lobbyists and will do the bidding of whoever puts the biggest check in their pocket.

Senatus Populusque Amercanus