Skip to main content

No honest broker here!

To even remotely think the USA could be seen as an honest and impartial broker in the endless Palestinian-Israel conflict is to be naive.    Worse still, the US Congress, yet again, has shown its true colours in the stupendous largess extended to Israel.      Problem is, that this dumb action in these troubled times will almost certainly lead to the rest of the world being drawn into something terrible as Israel does whatever it wants, including the probability of attacking Iran.   AlterNet explains it all.     Be troubled.....

"By once again demonstrating Congress’s bottomless cup of munificence for Israel, actions last week by the House of Representatives make painful across-the-board budget cuts more likely.  U.S. taxpayers will be even more complicit than before in bankrolling Israel’s nearly 45-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip. Additionally, the American "generosity" will shred whatever little credibility the United States has left in attempting to portray itself as an “honest broker” to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on an equitable basis.  And urging new weapons systems for Israel could help facilitate an attack on Iran.   

"On May 7, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense released its draft 2013 budget bill, which includes an eye-popping $949 million for the research, development, and procurement of anti-missile systems to benefit Israel, including $680 million to purchase additional Iron Dome batteries.

The utility of the Iron Dome system, which is designed to intercept and destroy the crude, short-range projectiles fired by militants from the Gaza Strip, was demonstrated in March during an exchange of fire in which Israel killed 24 Palestinians and wounded 79. Iron Dome reportedly knocked down over 90 percent of missiles headed for civilian areas, resulting in no Israeli casualties.

While both Israeli and Palestinian civilians should of course be free from the fear of incoming missiles, by funding Iron Dome, the United States is largely immunizing Israeli civilians from the effects of conflict while leaving Palestinians in the Gaza Strip extremely vulnerable to Israel’s much more lethal assaults conducted with the most sophisticated U.S. missiles. While the Gaza Strip’s 1.6 million residents remain beleaguered under Israel’s blockade and collective punishment, Iron Dome perpetuates this injustice by significantly reducing the cost to Israel of maintaining this policy.

This funding comes on top of a record-breaking request from the Obama Administration to provide Israel with $3.1 billion in military aid in the 2013 budget.  All told, the U.S. taxpayer is likely to be on the hook for more than $4 billion in weapons for Israel this budget cycle, at a time when the White House has proposed budget cuts for food safety inspection, water infrastructure, medical care and much more to avert the prospect of the across-the-board budget cuts from taking effect.

By dramatically increasing money for weapons to Israel — the 28th wealthiest country in the world in 2011 according to the International Monetary Fund, with a per capita income greater than Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, and South Korea — the House risks budget cuts to important social services that benefit millions of Americans for the sake of perpetuating Israel’s military occupation.

In addition, on Wednesday, the House voted 411-2 with 9 abstentions to pass the AIPAC-inspired U.S.-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act, a resolution with far-reaching implications for making the United States more complicit in Israel’s human rights abuses of the Palestinian people and for facilitating an Israeli strike against Iran.  Although no price tag is attached to this resolution, by dangling before Israel even greater promises of access to U.S. weapons, the resolution sets the stage for more taxpayer largesse in the future."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...