U.S. House passes war pact with Israel (H.R. 4133)

[lucky4034]

The House of Representatives suspended its parliamentary rules and passed H.R. 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, or USIESC.

It was drafted by AIPAC and sponsored by Eric Cantor. It includes more money for Israel, more missile subsidies, more training subsidies, more tank subsidies, more munition subsidies, more intelligence given to Israel, and a call to make NATO more Israel-centric. It also reaffirms "the enduring commitment of the United States to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state."

It passed 411-2. Only Rep. Ron Paul, and one Democrat, dissented from the herd.




House Passes Stealth Legislation


H.R. 4133: United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012 - Legislative Digest - GOP.gov

Not surprising... I said when we pulled out of Iraq, that we did it in preparations for Iran. I also said that Israel was told to sit tight until the Presidential Election was over and Obama gets re-elected.


Oh and btw... I always had very little respect for politicians in general, and while I don't always agree with Ron Paul on every subject... he is the only politician I have found to be worth a damn. I'd be proud to have him represent me in any form of government.

 

[dukeboy_318]

Ive said it many times and I'll say it again, they(the idiots of in power of multiple nations) are setting up a pre-World War I/ 2 type situation, on purpose or coincidentally, who knows, but there are a lot of similarities to the Pre WW 1 days and whats happening. What will be the straw that breaks the back?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Ive said it many times and I'll say it again, they(the idiots of in power of multiple nations) are setting up a pre-World War I/ 2 type situation, on purpose or coincidentally, who knows, but there are a lot of similarities to the Pre WW 1 days and whats happening. What will be the straw that breaks the back?

You might also want to review the French Revolution of 1789. Aside from riding horses and dressing funny, it is a dead parallel for the United States today!

 

[dukeboy_318]

You might also want to review the French Revolution of 1789. Aside from riding horses and dressing funny, it is a dead parallel for the United States today!

Very true, couldnt agree more, but I chose WW1 since most people have some familiarity with it, my guess is that over 70% of the adult population would have no clue when you say French Revolution

 

[IndyDave1776]

Very true, couldnt agree more, but I chose WW1 since most people have some familiarity with it, my guess is that over 70% of the adult population would have no clue when you say French Revolution

You are right, but the parallel is much stronger. The budget/debt crisis, the participants down to the local version of the Occupy movement, it is just too eerily identical! I would have no idea had I not taken a college class based on the events in France leading up to, including, and immediately after the revolution.

 

[GIJEW]

You think Israel has been initiating wars against the arabs?? Israel has been the side willing to compromise, and those compromises have been met with implacable hostility or violence. Go learn some history.
Regarding aid to Israel, most of it is like discount coupons to buy goodies at McDonald Douglas etc. subsidizing defense contractors and their employees jobs.(no, Israel has been making it's own merkava tanks for 30yrs, if you say thats part of the package you're info is suspect).
A lot of the missle defense systems and other "high tech" stuff that the US is "giving" to Israel is made WITH Israeli help. Israel has also developed a defense system against low-trajectory missles--katyushas called "iron dome"and is working on an board anti-tank missle defense system for tanks.I suppose you think the US doesn't benefit from any of that?
Intelligence "given" to Israel? There is a treaty between the US and Israel to SHARE intel vital to each others security.
Training? There is plenty of training that the US military recieves from the IDF.
Forward deployment of missle defense assets?Where's the most likely place to have a real-life test other than Israel which the Iranians say they want to "wipe off the map" while working on nukes? btw Israel has been a real-life "lab" for testing US weapons since the aftermath of the 6 day war.

I don't have an argument about reassessing our role in the UN or NATO, And I don't think that there's anything wrong with reassessing foreign aid either, but your BS about Israel starting wars with the arabs shows that there's more to your whining about "aid" to Israel than money--especially since the US gets it's money's worth out of that investment.

The House of Representatives suspended its parliamentary rules and passed H.R. 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, or USIESC.

It was drafted by AIPAC and sponsored by Eric Cantor. It includes more money for Israel, more missile subsidies, more training subsidies, more tank subsidies, more munition subsidies, more intelligence given to Israel, and a call to make NATO more Israel-centric. It also reaffirms "the enduring commitment of the United States to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state."

It passed 411-2. Only Rep. Ron Paul, and one Democrat, dissented from the herd.




House Passes Stealth Legislation


H.R. 4133: United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012 - Legislative Digest - GOP.gov

 

[rambone]

You think Israel has been initiating wars against the arabs??
I don't have an argument about reassessing our role in the UN or NATO, And I don't think that there's anything wrong with reassessing foreign aid either, but your BS about Israel starting wars with the arabs shows that there's more to your whining about "aid" to Israel than money--especially since the US gets it's money's worth out of that investment.

Are you talking to me? What did I say to prompt this diatribe?

If you want to subsidize other countries, pony up your own money.

 

[smokingman]

I love the United States of America.

It is the only thing I can say at this point with out crossing a few lines.

 

[88GT]

From Paul's quote in Rambone's post upthread:

This bill states that it is the policy of the United States to "reaffirm the enduring commitment of the United States to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state." However, according to our Constitution the policy of the United States government should be to protect the security of the United States, not to guarantee the religious, ethnic, or cultural composition of a foreign country. In fact, our own Constitution prohibits the establishment of any particular religion in the US.

Two thoughts. The two actions are NOT mutually exclusive, and an argument is easily made that some alliances actually make the whole security thing possible. Golly gee, where would we be without the entanglements with the Frogs in the mid- to late-1780s? Second point: that last sentence is one of the reasons Paul comes across as a dithering idiot. Support for Israel or any other nation is NOT the establishment of religion in the U.S.

I think that little two-letter word - we - is the problem.

The collective "we" that elected Jimmy Carter doesn't include me, or many people on this board, yet the current collective "we" is (yes, is) saddled with wrestling with those obligations.

In the same vein, many of the "we" who elected FDR 4 times are long gone, yet "we" and generations of "we" to come are saddled with the massive debt for which his policies laid another cornerstone.

While "we" are at it, since he was elected by the current "we", should we support and keep the word of every proclamation and deed of the "we" figurehead currently in the oval office?

I think if we could find a way to restrict "we" to the present and the relative near term, we and all future "we"'s would be one hell of a lot better off.

WTF is the point of a Constitution and codified law if that's how you think?

 

[rambone]

Two thoughts. The two actions are NOT mutually exclusive, and an argument is easily made that some alliances actually make the whole security thing possible.

Can't we be friends without having to pay for the privilege?

Second point: that last sentence is one of the reasons Paul comes across as a dithering idiot. Support for Israel or any other nation is NOT the establishment of religion in the U.S.

He's right to criticize the wording of the bill. It specifically pledges to preserve their state-sponsored religion.

I doubt you'd have such harsh words to say if we were discussing Mitt Romney.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Can't we be friends without having to pay for the privilege?

Not when they would have had their own money had we not strong-armed them into giving it away.

 

[88GT]

Can't we be friends without having to pay for the privilege?

Maybe. I thought you libertarians were big proponents of capitalism.

The problem I have with the opposition to this is that most who oppose it do so out of some ridiculous utopian notion that all alliances are equally bad simply because it's an alliance. It's just stupid. It ignores reality. There is no room for "going it alone" any more.

He's right to criticize the wording of the bill. It specifically pledges to preserve their state-sponsored religion.

THEIR state-sponsored religion. Not ours. He predicated his opposition on the argument that it was a violation of our Constitution. It is not. This is exactly the kind of garbage that keeps Paul on the fringe.

I doubt you'd have such harsh words to say if we were discussing Mitt Romney.

And there it is. The "I can't best you with the actual merits of my argument, so I'll trot out the straw man deflection."

If Romney said something as stupid as Paul, sure I would. It isn't about the "who," it's about the "what." It's never been about the "who." Paul picks stupid battles. And he justifies them with stupid comments. His reasoning is sound. He's just an idiot at conveying it to people who don't already see things his way.

 

[rambone]

Maybe. I thought you libertarians were big proponents of capitalism.

My government robs me and gives billions to other governments.

That's what you call "capitalism"?

No, I guess I'll have to disagree with you once again. That is not capitalism, that is international socialism. And if Israel gave a damn about the USA, they would stop taking money that we don't have to give. I've dumped "friends" for less mooching than this.

THEIR state-sponsored religion. Not ours.

Quite right. Not a vital interest of the USA. They can uphold it with THEIR money.

He predicated his opposition on the argument that it was a violation of our Constitution. It is not. This is exactly the kind of garbage that keeps Paul on the fringe.

The fringy garbage stupid idiotic Paul quote you posted doesn't say the act is a violation; it references the constitution for a guideline on the direction of foreign policy. He's right in saying that the constitution doesn't suggest fighting for the ethnic makeup of other nations. I see nothing he said being false.

I know, I know. Garbage!

And there it is. The "I can't best you with the actual merits of my argument, so I'll trot out the straw man deflection."

If Romney said something as stupid as Paul, sure I would. It isn't about the "who," it's about the "what." It's never been about the "who." Paul picks stupid battles. And he justifies them with stupid comments. His reasoning is sound. He's just an idiot at conveying it to people who don't already see things his way.

Strawman huh? Did I avoid your argument in any way? I'm just stating a peripheral observation.

Its what I've noticed after all the hundreds of stories we've discussed about Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, and the rest. Its hard enough to get you to agree their policies are wrong, much less see you call them names. Take that observation for what its worth.

 

[netsecurity]

It appears to me that this is just a clear sign that the US/Obama will not stop Iran from getting nukes, otherwise this would hardly seem necessary, unless Egypt is planning something.

 

[thebishopp]

Come on now. Its are job as donkeys to serve our Jewish masters.

Major rabbi says non-Jews are donkeys, created to serve Jews

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

THEIR state-sponsored religion. Not ours. He predicated his opposition on the argument that it was a violation of our Constitution. It is not. This is exactly the kind of garbage that keeps Paul on the fringe.

And so the religious belief of choice by the majority here in the US has zero interest in the Jewish Peoples and their holding of their homeland?

Is it about our government supporting their state sponsored religion, or is it about our government supporting them to affirm our religion?

 

[strahd71]

Being jewish isnt about a religion its about being a race of people

Jake

 

[ATOMonkey]

Being jewish isnt about a religion its about being a race of people

Jake

And really not even a race as much as a nationality.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

It appears to me that this is just a clear sign that the US/Obama will not stop Iran from getting nukes, otherwise this would hardly seem necessary, unless Egypt is planning something.

All you need to do is look at the candidates in the upcoming Egyptian Presidential Election (a former Mubarek administration Islamist, and two Muslim Brotherhood Islamists) to see that sooner - rather than later - Israel is going to be back to its 1967 security situation and all the so-called "Peace Initiatives" forced on them by the US and the UN will have been so much wasted time, effort, and money.

To me the idea of "having no entangling alliances" is just another way of saying "let's all be hermits and pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist". It's a cold cold world when you have no friends, and if you won't help your friends, what kind of friend are you?

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Come on now. Its are job as donkeys to serve our Jewish masters.

Major rabbi says non-Jews are donkeys, created to serve Jews

Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan says Jews are pigs and apes, so what does either statement prove (except that bigots come in all shapes, sizes, colors, and religions.