01-07-2009, 09:35 AM
To the extent that all nation states will do things which they consider to be in their national interest - but not necessarily in the interests of their allies - I agree with you both about Israel. But this only extends so far, I believe.
Israel is a client state of the US and depends entirely upon it financially and militarily. If the US were deadly serious about hindering a course of action Israel were taking, or planning to take, Israel would abandon that course of action or face the financial consequences and the likelihood of the weapons and intelligence tap being turned off. Of course, an independent sovereign state may still choose to proceed even with such threats hanging over them because it is felt that to do otherwise would be a greater jeopardy to their survival.
The point I am poorly labouring here, is the need always to focus on who is the true master and who is the servant. For me the US is the master. Whether this be with the presidents knowledge and blessing, or not, or with a nod and a wink at an intelligence level or with the Pentagon’s or State Departments blessing is arguable.
In regard to the USS Liberty incident, I was told years ago that there was more going on than met the eye. There was a US submersible (not submarine) in the area that recorded the attacks. US bombers carrying nuclear weapons were dispatched in a counter-strike - but were, thankfully, recalled at the last moment. A senior officer in the Pentagon stated “we were wearing brown underwear” for awhile.
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/...645&page=5
Post 47
From the foregoing it is apparent that it is the US who wields the power and Israel who tugs its forelock in obedience, even if that obedience is often grudging, sometimes petulant and in extraordinary cases withdrawn altogether.
Israel is a client state of the US and depends entirely upon it financially and militarily. If the US were deadly serious about hindering a course of action Israel were taking, or planning to take, Israel would abandon that course of action or face the financial consequences and the likelihood of the weapons and intelligence tap being turned off. Of course, an independent sovereign state may still choose to proceed even with such threats hanging over them because it is felt that to do otherwise would be a greater jeopardy to their survival.
The point I am poorly labouring here, is the need always to focus on who is the true master and who is the servant. For me the US is the master. Whether this be with the presidents knowledge and blessing, or not, or with a nod and a wink at an intelligence level or with the Pentagon’s or State Departments blessing is arguable.
In regard to the USS Liberty incident, I was told years ago that there was more going on than met the eye. There was a US submersible (not submarine) in the area that recorded the attacks. US bombers carrying nuclear weapons were dispatched in a counter-strike - but were, thankfully, recalled at the last moment. A senior officer in the Pentagon stated “we were wearing brown underwear” for awhile.
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/...645&page=5
Post 47
Quote:Only weeks after the September 11, 2001, attacks, Charles Krauthammer, the Washington Post columnist and mouthpiece of the neoconservatives, revealed the target list of the Bush administration as it set out on its post-9/11 war footing. The list included six nations: Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, and the Palestinian Authority. While the priority allotted to Afghanistan and subsequently Iraq was not in dispute, the remaining order was in flux.
Israel was given a free hand in dealing with the Palestinian Authority (PA). President George W. Bush completely shunned and isolated PA President Yasser Arafat, until he died under siege in November 2004. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was allowed to use brutal military tactics to crush the Al-Aqsa intifada, reoccupying much of the West Bank, and setting up hundreds of military checkpoints devastating Palestinian life and what remained of the PA.
From the foregoing it is apparent that it is the US who wields the power and Israel who tugs its forelock in obedience, even if that obedience is often grudging, sometimes petulant and in extraordinary cases withdrawn altogether.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14