The neocon bush cabal seems to be operating simultaneously

[leftofthedial]

in the interests of Saudi Arabia and the other Middle Eastern oil kingdoms and in the interests of the most rabid RW interests in Israel.

The two would seem to be contradictory, yet there it is. Bankrupting America, marginalizing the secular middle class in America, illegally invading and occupying Iraq, threatening Syria and Iran, fragmenting the US-Western European alliance, making only a token show of invading Afghanistan, befriending Pakistan . . .

What is the connection between the interests of the Saudis (et al) and the Israelis? What else do they have in store for us?

:shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Oh jeebus

for god sakes any careful studnet of this movement realizes Isarel is fully dispossable,

Which I wish some people would realize

[leftofthedial]

2. which explains why all the US national political candidates parade before AIPAC

to be vetted . . .

[rockymountaindem]

4. That's because they're competing for attention and cash

If they would all just chuck Israel under the bus simultaneously, that would be the end of AIPAC's prominence. As it is, our politicans compete for their support because AIPAC is a relevant group. If both political parties were to decided that Israel wasn't worth our trouble anymore, AIPAC wouldn't have anybody to lobby for and would lose its importance.

[leftofthedial]

5. Virtually ALL the leading PNACers in the cabal's early days

had strong ties to Israel.

I don't think their power is superficial or illusory.

[rockymountaindem]

6. It isn't superficial or illusory

I'm arguing in favor of nadinbzrzenski's point, which is that the US could sever its ties with Israel but not so easily with Saudi Arabia. The people in power now have whatever ties to Israel that they have, and support it for whatever reasons they support it because they aren't convinced that the alternative, abandoning that support, would somehow make the USA, themselves or anybody they care about better off. If the world situation were to change drastically, the equation might change, prompting the US to abandon our ties with Israel for some better alternative. What NB is saying is that the threshhold for such as switch is higher for Saudi Arabia (due to our oil imports) than for Israel.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. The only reason Israel matters

is the same reason that piece of land has mattered since at least the time of Ramses II

It is of strategic importance

Now look at the history of US Relations with Israel

Yes Truman was quick to recognize the state but until 1967 our relationship with Israel was not that warm.

And if things go a certain way (I could list several), our support for Israel will dry up OVERNIGHT.

We cannot afford to give the finger to the Saudis though, and those who ate truly paying attention realize that Israel is truly disposable, well anybody except AIPAC that is... or they realize it to the point that it makes them very aggressive in their lobbying.

[rockymountaindem]

8. I'm not arguing with you

As far as base security interests are concerned, Saudi Arabia is far more important to the US than Israel, thanks to oil. It is mostly cultural ties that bind the US and Israel, as well as a shared Cold-War history after 1970. Those links are much more easily broken than the ties of oil.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. I'm aware of that, put it in the wrong response

it was for left of the dial.

It amazes me how little history people really know of what is going on and what drives these decisions

A friend of mine finally got it (and has since forgotten it) after watching F 911

Then again at times I just want to cry if you know what I mean

[rockymountaindem]

12. I know the feeling

I don't know where people get the idea that the US would lay it on the line for Israel. We had that chance in 1967 and didn't pick up the gauntlet. I don't know what anybody could point to now that has changed since then.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Though we came this close to nuclear war with the soviets

in 1973 during the Yom Kipur war

;-)

[leftofthedial]

22. It is no longer 1967

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. But that is the point

1967 we came very close to sending troops into the cauldron... and in '73 we went into nuclear alert.

No more, 1980 nope, we did not

The recent war in Lebanon, we did not either

Though you chew on this, the cabal has now placed the Ameircan military in Iraq in a weird situaiton, much of the NATO 5.56 ammo comes from Israel since we have not gone to a war time footing, since ahem, it costs money

[leftofthedial]

26. in 1980, the neocons had not yet seized power in America

nor had they yet sealed power by attempting the assassination of their puppet Reagan

In the recent war in Lebanon, Israel's borders were not threatened. Besides, there was almost nothing we could do--at least militarily. We're already getting our asses kicked in Iraq. Politically, we pressured Syria, which is a remarkable escalation of previous bush diplomatic policy in the region which consisted primarily of doing jackshit.

I'm not saying that the US is ruled by Israel. I'm saying we seem to be serving their interests and those interests seem--unintuitively--to correspond to Saudi et al interests.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. They don't

the Saudis are loosing patience since they see the rise of a Sh-ia crescent that will lead to instability inside the Kingdom

In fact, our policies have truly destabilized the ME to the point that the elites now fear for their futures.

As to Israel, they do follow the interest of a very narrow group of people in the Likud, not even all the Likud

[leftofthedial]

20. then why has their influence on American politics increased steadily

over the last decade or so?

Why did so many Israel-connected neocons architect the illegal invasion of Iraq? Why do American political candidates ALL kow tow to AIPAC?

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. AIPAC is the source of millions in money when you

are running as a candidate.. if you want another group to have that kind of influence, they will the moment they can raise that much money

But AIPAC has also become a boogey man for the left.

They have power and influence but their ties are not stronger today. We did not go to war in Iraq for Isarel.. we went to war in Iraq to prove a badly thought out academic theory

Though if you ask me, AIPAC are idiots... after all many in the christian movement, who also agree with PNAC, know that they need Israel in order to bring the end of days.

[leftofthedial]

27. I agree that idiotic academic theories and religiously insane nut jobs

have played their roles.

I don't claim that we illegally invaded Iraq solely at the behest of Israel. I'm saying our illegal invasion served Israeli interests. It also served Saudi interests.

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. And I will repeat myself here

it served the very narrow interests of a SMALL if rather vocal minority in the Likud

As to Saudi Interest

They are chiefly Sunni

There is a Sh ia crescent forming.

How exactly are they served?

[leftofthedial]

9. Logic tells me that once the US has permanent bases in the Middle East,

say in Iraq . . .

that geopolitically, Israel becomes arguably "disposable"


but the bush cabal still seems to me to have been an extremely unlikely nexus of Israeli and Saudi interests

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. No, they will not become disposable at that point

let me list the points where Israel will become disposable

1.- We attack Iran, unleashing a regional war. The US will NOT have the troops or materiel to defend itself, let alone Israel (This is the most dramatic right now in the potential by the way)

2.- Israel and the Palestinians finally seat down and do peace... at that point the region will becomes much more stable... and not only the US but the West might pull back (At this point this looks like a fantasy option)

3.- We find alternate energy sources... our strategic need to remain relevant in the ME goes away, we will all pull back from the region, including Israel

4.- For whatever reason everybody and their sister decide to attack Israel and the Nukes fly... kind of self apparent

5.- The US economy collapses, if you think we are inner looking, hold on to your horses.

6.- Israel, for whatever reason, does something that even the American People see as a problem (can you say Apartheid) and the American people decide to boycott her, yep the SA scenario... all over again.

And these are from the top of my head

[leftofthedial]

11. respectfully, I don't completely agree

until we have stable military bases in the region, we "need" Israel. They are in no way "fully disposable."

Our "need" for Saudi et al oil is greater than our geopolitical "need" for Israel, true.

But that's not my question. Review the actions of the bush cabal. They have acted consistently in the interests of both Israel and Saudi Arabia et al. What is this convergence of interests all about?

[rockymountaindem]

13. The US has bases in Turkey, the UAE and probably on Cyprus

Britain still has bases on that island, AFAIK, so I see no reason why we wouldn't be able to access them. Not to mention our cozy relations with Egypt, our naval base in Aden, and on and on. The US already has plenty of permanent bases in the region.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. You are forgetting Bahrain

and Kuwait

[leftofthedial]

19. Turkey is not reliable.

Recall, they denied permission for launching the invasion of Iraq from Turkey, forcing a radical change in strategy very shortly before the illegal invasion.

we don't have bases in Israel. We rely on Israel's potential threat to uncooperative states in the ME. None of our bases is sufficient for anything except support. We can't launch significant operations from our bases in the region. They cannot handle significant numbers of personnel or equipment.

The PNACers were at least out in the open with their stated need for permanent bases in Iraq.



Even if you and nadinb are right and Israel is irrelevant, it still doesn't explain their obvious and pervasive influence on the bush cabal (and seemingly on the entire US political process).

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Israel gives the US overflight rights

as well as bases... (in the Sinai blue helmets in theory)

As to AIPAC, they are as influential on US Policy as the Cuban Americans...and the moment they stop being useful... gone,

The cabal cares about control and power, and these guys are useful idiots for the moment

Read Leo Strauss... the master behind the ideology.

(And take out a dictionary as well, good ol' Leo was and is a pain to read)

Oh and incidentally Isarel serves a function, since at least 1967 for the US... a proxy state to fight wars with...

[leftofthedial]

25. I agree that Israel is a proxy state

they certainly are perceived as such in the Muslim world.

So are you saying our removal of Saddam, establishment of US military bases (large ones that can accomodate multiple combat divisions), our hardlining against Syria and Iraq, our friendly neutering of Jordan, our hands-off approach to Israel-Palestinian relations--all these actions that seem to me to clearly serve Israeli interests--are coincidence? Or that they are not actually in Israel's interests?



NOTE: proxy in terms of their military presence and the "brake" they put on Muslim regional interests. It's neocolonialism in action.

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. Once again

you are seeing Israel in monolithic terms

They have served the interest of a SMALL but rather vocal minority in the Likud party, not ALL of Israel, or for that matter, the whole of the Likud party.

In fact, why do you think we have a new center right party in Israel (Kadima)

But they have not served the interests of the state of israel and trust me, bibi netanyahu, as noisy as he is... is NOT Israel, fortunately

[leftofthedial]

36. that's why in my OP

I said, "the most rabid RW" faction in Israel.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. Yes but the most rabid faction

has not been in power... why do you think Bibi was screaming at Sharon?

I do follow their politics, they are fun and educational and a source for fiction... at least they are more believable than ours

[European Socialist]

3. Answer your last sentence and you will reveal the 911 evil doers.

[BuyingThyme]

17. You're making a big mistake.

It's not about Americans, not about Israelis, and not about the people who live in Saudi Arabia. (I don't know what to call the people who live in Saudi Arabia.)

It's about a small group of people who are conspiring to rule the world.

They don't give a flying fuck about Americans, Israelis, or the people who live in Saudi Arabia.

And they only believe in the concepts of country and religion to the extent which country and religion can be used to control the masses.

[leftofthedial]

28. exactly

how did this nexus come about?

Saudi Arabia always has been a repressive totalitarian monarchy, but Israel and the US are allegedy "democracies."

[BuyingThyme]

29. I think it was set in stone as of the end of WWII.

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. Our alliance with the Kingdom goes back to the 1930s

actually... and was formalized during WW II... we needed the oil and they had it...

Somethings have not changed, and will not change until all the oil has been taken out.

In fact the first agreements were signed by FDR during the war.

As to Israel, our alliance with them came circa 1967.. before that it was classified by the State Department as a Communist State and if the Soviets had forgotten their antisemitism and jumped on the oportunity, Israel might have become TEHIR client state, not ours

[AnOhioan]

18. Understatment of the year

"in the interests of Saudi Arabia and the other Middle Eastern oil kingdoms and in the interests of the most rabid RW interests in Israel."


It has been this way since the chimp stole the office.

[catzies]

30. I think it's as simple as "We make money off both sides."

With this group, stupid and greedy are the easiest moves to make.

[leftofthedial]

38. seems to be the case

alas.

raise your glass to the triumph of capitalism

[baldguy]

31. The RW wants to protect Israel from Islamic extremists

Because they want to save it to destroy themselves.

[PATRICK]

39. Divide and conquer

but with different slices of the pie.

Saudis, Not Saudi Arabia: Of course the need to survive both the Shiites and Muslim extremism in general fuels the "haves" among the hated princes, even those with a taste for anti-Semitism and terrorist backing beyond just distracting the focus of their own people.

Sharon is like Cheney, only more dead. The Israeli long term need to survive by getting at the surging Shiite oil Empire by tumbling all the building blocks. That leaves the besieged money grubbing monarchy of Saudi Arabia as a friendly beast safely dominant in the ruins of others.

Now what do BOTH have to gain from the US? ALL the dirty work done by the military. All the money services brokered by our economic untouchable(supposedly) behemoth. And it isn't such a bad thing that the US becomes weakened for anything else in that region and among Muslims. Hooray ,thin the Israelis who remain now the only non-enemy among the peoples of the region. The US would need Israel more than ever to sustain the oil honey pot and concomitant military empire bases. Hooray, say the Saudis who get everything they want plus a similar dependency of the US on them as the sole stability for oil. Now the US can't maneuver anywhere or take sides. It is the US and its greed which is neutralized, not terrorism per se. Halliburton settles in like a dove ahead of and behind the bombs. A vulture, a turkey,an ostrich, a dodo. Voila peace in the ME because the US is too big and stupid to get out of the way. And when the oil runs out, the money games like leaves in autumn will continue jut like the Bank of England sans Empire meanders on in total unmeaning but self legitimized power.

And how simple anything in the ME would be if anything worked at all that simply. Especially since it ignores the people in each and every country who are generally sick to death of all the manipulators on the various tips of the blood and bucks triangle. Eventually the stability of keeping the people distracted means all out war somewhere. But even that tried and untrue retreat to mayhem could destroy the "balance". Yet they would prefer that and the massacre to letting the peoples democratically unite for sanity. AT least in the chaos of war the few can escape accountability. As they most often have.