Why U.S. supports Israel

Brad DeLong delong at econ.Berkeley.EDU
Tue May 14 16:23:59 PDT 2002



>BM says that in 1948, Israel had a military force clearly superior
>to that of any Arab country, and for practical purposes superior
>to the lot of them. In light of the importance of the Canal and oil
>fields, wouldn't that make it a strategic asset then?
>
>Now of course its military and intelligence forces are formidable.
>They also have nukes. Wouldn't they be a strategic asset now?
>Do you find yourself a little over-extended on this?
>
>Republican Nut-Boy

A strategic asset against whom? In what state of the world would we like to see Israeli tanks roll where? Countries we want to stay nice and peaceful and commercial loathe Israel--and loathe us too because we support Israel.

Would we have wanted israeli tanks to roll...

Against a Russian attack from north to take control of the Persian Gulf?--But rolling Israel's tanks would have made the Arabs join the Russians.

Against Saudi princelings who had decided never to sell oil to the Infidels again?--But only the presence of Israel and the fact of U.S. support for it led them to ever think of the oil weapon at all.

Against Syrian Soviet Puppets?--But operation "Peace for Galilee" was the only thing that came close to turning Assad the Elder into a tool of the Soviet Union.

U.S. support for Israel is a strategic pain in the **** as regards our real, material, strategic interests in the Middle East--(back then) to contain the Soviet Union and to keep the oil flowing...

Brad DeLong



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list