Ummm… shoot… what was the up side of this again?

"Is the middle east conflict more about protecting Israeli sovereignty than democracy and oil?"
Oil.
Another thread about oil.

Due to the indoctrination of the American electorate by the unrelenting propaganda that has been waged in the US (for the past 40-years) about Israel and the Middle East ... most Americans seem to think that we do have such a 'responsibility'... and their 'thinking so' is proof of the power of 'perception management' ... because the ideologies that comprise the 'special relationship' between Israel and the US are fabricated and completely counter to the classic ideals of National Sovereignty.

With friends like Israel, who NEEDS enemies? We have pumped trillions of our tax dollars to them, given them our most advanced equipment, had to rationalize and defend any and every act they do--and veto like crazy in the UN, had to take enemy stances against every other nation in the area on their behalf (who were then driven to the USSR, against us), and in the process, we have invited/challenged the oil nations to punish us, economically.

Our relationship with Israel is really the tail wagging the dog. We have no policy over there that is not first approved by Israel. So, it's kinda fruitless for us to debate these matters.

Oh my GOD! Of course they're friendly, the States basically stole the land for their Homeland and has continued to support and arm them as they oppress another people. AIPAC (The American Israel Public Affairs Committee), just approved the next president, one that will kowtow to Israel's every whim...because basically if he didn't, he would simply disappear from the running. I think Israel is a far bigger threat to start the inklings of the next World War than Iran is at this point. But the media has done it's job of doping the general public, with yet more stories about evil Islamic doctrine...

What do you think?

Will siding with Israeli incur the wrath is Russia, China?

Is it the US's responsibility to support Israeli objectives?

Is the middle east conflict more about protecting Israeli sovereignty than democracy and oil?

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said he prefers that Iran's nuclear ambitions be halted by diplomatic means, but has pointedly declined to rule out military action.

I guess I just don't understand [...]

I never thought [...]

and that's exactly why you haven't reached that conclusion.

first think, then conclude. it might help.

I agree entirely, unfortunately making any critical statement toward Israeli policies or direction is immediately flagged as an anti-semitic attack, by so many sources.

Zionists, invariably refer to themselves as Jews, which is not entirely inaccurate. As in this gem

However, the stated goals of the Isrealis and Zionism are in NO WAY related to the religion of Judaism or the Jewish people as a whole. And people need to stop blurring those lines.

I have to also agree with the people who comment on the fact that many of the current advisors to the White House have a "Pro-Zionist" leaning. People, like Richard Perle or William Kristol, scare me when they outlines their wishes to basically remove all muslim-dominated countries starting with Iraq, and moving on to "assimilate"? (for want of a better word) Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, etc, etc. These are not the goals of Nation who wishes to "Protect" the poor or oppressed societies of the earth, they are the actions of an Imperial agenda to make all countries toe the line that is understood and accepted by the West.

In fact I think the US should cut off all support to Israel and let them fight their own battles ... leave us out of it.

That's easily accomplished. Just have every President who ordered a war that was illegal according to UN rules, to be put in prison for life, for war crimes, and apologise to all of those nations, and pay for what America did to them.

That would be fine with me.

I have no clue what that answer has to do with the US just withdrawing all support to Israel ... makes about as much sense as quoting the price of eggs in China ... eh?

I think Israel is quite capable of and has done an excellent job of making their own enemies ... they don't need to blame it all on the US. They need to quit pizzing their neighbors off with their terroristic attitudes and they won't have to worry about someone not wanting them there.

Even if there are any number of posters in here who think Israel can do no wrong, that doesn't make it so. They are very quickly getting the reputation of being the world's greatest terrorists ... perhaps coming in only second to their big brother ... the USA.

Uh huh ... that's right ... I said the USA with the Bush policy ... pretty much launched our world status to the number 1 terrorist nation in the world ...

If the US gets sucked into Israel's conflict with Iran ... it would be because of all the Zionist money floating around in the pockets in Washington. It's been known for quite some time that the Zionists brag they own Washington. That's been proven time and time again ... every time they veto a resolution or sanction against Israel. They are beginning to look like quite the fools for it ... all over the world.

It's quite the reverse.

In that work, the two professors (Mearsheimer & Walt) have this to say about the power of the Lobby over the U.S. Congress:

"The bottom line is that AIPAC, a de facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on Congress, with the result that U.S. policy towards Israel is not debated there, even though that policy has important consequences for the entire world. In other words, one of the three main branches of the government is firmly committed to supporting Israel. As one former Democratic senator, Ernest Hollings, noted on leaving office, 'you can't have an Israeli policy other than what AIPAC gives you around here.'"

What AIPAC had been giving out was that the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006 was a litmus test – either you voted for it, or, as a local AIPAC representative, Amy Rotenberg, put it to Bill Harper, Rep. McCollum's chief of staff:

"On behalf of [myself] the Jewish community, AIPAC, and the voters of the Fourth District, Congresswoman McCollum's support for terrorists will not be tolerated."

Rep. McCollum's response to this smear has been exemplary – and indicative of a growing backlash against the Lobby. Her letter to AIPAC takes them out to the woodshed and gives them such a thrashing that the sound of it is reverberating throughout Washington. Averring that "During my nineteen years serving in elected office, including the past five years as a Member of Congress, never has my name and reputation been maligned or smeared as it was last week by a representative of AIPAC," McCollum goes on to say in a letter to AIPAC President Howard Kohr that "until I receive a formal, written apology from your organization I must inform you that AIPAC representatives are not welcome in my offices or for meetings with my staff."
Ouch!

Massing shows how the Lobby, utilizing an effective combination of money, organization, and relentless insistence on absolute fealty to AIPAC's agenda, runs roughshod over anyone so foolish as to oppose it. Money is pumped into the coffers of its sock-puppets:

"AIPAC itself is not a political action committee. Rather, by assessing voting records and public statements, it provides information to such committees, which donate money to candidates; AIPAC helps them to decide who Israel's friends are according to AIPAC's criteria. The Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that analyzes political contributions, lists a total of thirty-six pro-Israel PACs, which together contributed $3.14 million to candidates in the 2004 election cycle. Pro-Israel donors give many millions more. Over the last five years, for instance, Robert Asher, together with his various relatives (a common device used to maximize contributions), has donated $148,000, mostly in sums of $1,000 or $2,000 to individual candidates.

"A former AIPAC staff member described for me how the system works. A candidate will contact AIPAC and express strong sympathies with Israel. AIPAC will point out that it doesn't endorse candidates but will offer to introduce him to people who do. Someone affiliated with AIPAC will be assigned to the candidate to act as a contact person. Checks for $500 or $1,000 from pro-Israel donors will be bundled together and provided to the candidate with a clear indication of the donors' political views."

On the other hand, anyone who so much as questions a single part of its legislative program is targeted for political destruction:

"This year, pro-Israel forces are targeting Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island. A Republican, Chafee has taken a number of positions that run counter to AIPAC's, including a vote against the Syria Accountability Act, which prepared the way for U.S. sanctions against that country. His challenger in the Republican primary, Stephen Laffey, has taken a strong pro-Israel position, and already he has received $5,000 (the maximum allowed) from the pro-Israel Washington Political Action Committee. In a recent report, the Forward noted that a Providence lawyer and pro-Israel activist named Norman Orodenker was preparing to send out a letter to other pro-Israel PACs praising Laffey's lifelong record of support for Israel."

After describing the Lobby's largely successful efforts to cow the Clinton administration, Massing illustrates a point made by Mearsheimer and Walt, that the Lobby serves as the de facto agent of a foreign power:

"Sometimes, the former Clinton official noted, the pressures on U.S. policy come from domestic groups, sometimes they come from Israel, and sometimes they come from Israel using its allies in the U.S. to influence administration policy. When Bibi Netanyahu was premier between 1996 and 1999, the former official recalls, 'he made the implicit threat that he could mobilize allies on the Hill or on the Christian right if President Clinton did not do what he wanted.' Later, at Camp David, 'Barak made a whole lot of calls when he felt he came under too much pressure – calls to allies in the Jewish community, and to politicians.'"

The success of the Lobby has been achieved by the careful application of pressure at key points: Congress, the executive branch, and the media. Yet the goals of the Lobby – succinctly summed up by Massing as "a powerful Israel free to occupy the territory it chooses; enfeebled Palestinians; and unquestioning support for Israel by the United States" – have never been supported by the American people. That is why such a tremendous lobbying effort is required, why so much money and political pressure is brought to bear on politicians to make sure they don't deviate one iota from the AIPAC party line. Because once someone – like, say Betty McCollum – gets away with a display of independence, it could turn into the equivalent of a run on a bank – there will be no stopping it.

In a videotaped message to the Iranian people, U.S. President Barack Obama has offered Iran a "new beginning" in its relations with the United States. Obama's message coincided with the start of spring, celebrated in the region with festivities known as Norouz. It's also the moment when the Iranian calendar marks the start of the new year.

The Norouz holiday is a time when families receive visitors and decorate a table with seven items that start with the Persian letter "S," including a hyacinth, an apple, lintel sprouts, and a coin. Usually there are additional symbols of renewed life -- including goldfish and decorated eggs and perhaps the poems of the classical poet Hafez -- on the table.

Obama came as a visitor, speaking respectfully but frankly as he offered his vision of future relations.

"So on the occasion of your New Year, I want you, the people and leaders of Iran, to understand the future that we seek Obama said. "It's a future with renewed exchanges among our people and greater opportunities for partnership and commerce. It's a future where the old divisions are overcome, where you and all of your neighbors and the wider world can live in greater security and greater peace."

'Rightful Place'

Obama did not detail the differences that keep Iran and the United States at odds. They include Iran's nuclear program -- which Washington believes is aimed at acquiring weapons -- and Tehran's support of groups like Hamas and Hizballah, which Washington considers terrorist organizations.

But he did say it is time for Iran to make a choice.

"The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations," Obama said. "You have that right -- but it comes with real responsibilities, and that place cannot be reached through terror or arms, but rather through peaceful actions that demonstrate the true greatness of the Iranian people and civilization. And the measure of that greatness is not the capacity to destroy, it is your demonstrated ability to build and create."

The Norouz message fulfills a campaign promise by Obama to try to engage Tehran in dialogue as he confronts the Iran nuclear crisis. It also follows up his inaugural address, in which he promised Washington's adversaries that he would "extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."

The effort drew wary praise in first official reactions from Tehran. Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad's press adviser said "we welcome the wish of the president of the United States to put away past differences."

But, Ali Akbar Javanfekr added, "[Obama] has to go further than words and take action."

The adviser said the United States is "mainly responsible" for the differences between Tehran and Washington and that "the only source of instability in the region is the American military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan."
I think the next

'I Am Proud Of Obama'

The Obama administration has already invited Iran to an international conference on Afghanistan later this month. Tehran has said it will consider the offer.

Obama's Norouz message, broadcast on Voice of America television, received a warm reception from listeners of RFE/RL's Radio Farda, which broadcasts in Persian.

"I am proud of Obama," one caller said. "Despite the fact that our government held Americans as hostages for a long time, Mr. Obama has extended his friendship to Iranians and Iranian government and congratulates our Norouz. I ask the Iranian government to extend its friendship to the world."

Another caller said, "I appreciate Mr. Obama's message . I don't think that this regime would understand this message because they are against all Iranian traditions."

"Our best gift for Norouz is Mr. Obama's message," another said, "and I hope that Iranian leaders pay attention to this message."

The U.S. president's initiative also drew praise in Europe.

"I think it's a very constructive message," said EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, speaking to journalists in Brussels. "I hope very much that the Iranians will pay good attention to what has been said by President Obama. I hope that that will open a new chapter in relations with Tehran."

'This Is The Best Way'

The EU has offered Iran incentives to give up controversial elements of its nuclear program, as demanded by the UN. But Brussels also supports ratcheting up sanctions if refuses to do so.

Moscow also welcomed Obama's outreach to Iran.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Rybakov said he believes the nuclear crisis can only be solved through open communication.

"We welcome [Obama's message]. We think it's important that the new U.S. administration intends to reach out to Iran in the political and diplomatic sphere," Ryabkov said. "We believe this is the best way to resolve concerns shared by the United States and the international community with regard to Iran's nuclear program."

Ryabkov said Tehran must show that its nuclear program is "exclusively peaceful."

Couldn't be more true...you called it.

Hey, for the pof poster who sided with Amagonnagetyou in so many other posts...especially about his feelings about destroying Israel and the Jews...and don't split hairs and try to "translate" what he said, he's a blatant Holocaust denying psycho...try living over there now with your "buddy". The guy whose policies you agreed with so adamantly on so many posts. He's a real peace-lovin' humanitarian, ain't he?

As far as the Jews controlling the media, the world, your next Big Mac...I had tomato instead of mayo, the Jews made me do it, I think they put the burger together...give me a break. Ahhhhh, so sadly funny. Isn't it amazing that such a small minority in the world supposedly controls so much...no, it's not about anti-semitism. (that was sarcasm in case some of the intelligentsia missed it.)

To the original question...you got it backwards, you should be thankful ISRAEL is on the U.S. side with all the shit that's goin' on over in Iran.

OP says: "Iran should never have been put on any kind of terrorist list and I hope this administration will finally get it right with them."
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, that's a knee-slapper!!! Thanks!

it's a rational democracy who doesn't behead people, cut out people's tongues, blow up trains, plains and automobiles across the land; who isn't threatening and menacing the world if they don't convert to Judaism, who doesn't kill its own people if there is dissension on the streets over an election, and who warns other people who they are fighting against to clear the area via pamphlets and announcement.

And isn't it funny, Mr. Armageddon mouthpiece over there, hates the Jews and Israel for "their murderous ways"...now, c'mon...that's pretty funny, isn't it.

who isn't threatening and menacing the world if they don't convert to Judaism

Look to your own; look to the burning of women who were thought to be witches, look to the multitudes of destruction across the world that has nothing to do with the Jewish people, look to the crucifiction not only of Christ but to untold numbers by the Romans, look to the stealing of this land from the Indians, look to Viet Nam....look around at the plagues against society which have been perpetrated by mankind...

Israel has done none of the things you listed

I have no "isms."

But I'm not going to sit by and listen to crap...save that for a white sheet pointy-headed group meeting where "Jews" can't hear you.

Oh, by the way, I'm sorry, did you say you're not anti-semitic? I must be imagining the Nuttinbutayaho.

Armaasholian.

Mr. Armageddon

Amagonnagetyou

claiming Jihad on all nations who don't prescribe to their way of life

You mean a "rational" democracy that places bombs under its enemies beds and blows up innocent men, women and children in the process?

You mean a "rational" democracy that steals the land of others for its own use, denies them their living and bulldozes their homes even when the family is still inside?

You mean a "rational" democracy that crushes people with tanks and heavy equipment, that bombs schools and hospitals, that shoots children in the head?

You mean a "rational" democracy that covets the land of others, invades nations, occupies their land and kills their people?

You mean a "rational" democracy that places bombs under its enemies beds and blows up innocent men, women and children in the process?

You mean a "rational" democracy that steals the land of others for its own use, denies them their living and bulldozes their homes even when the family is still inside?

You mean a "rational" democracy that crushes people with tanks and heavy equipment, that bombs schools and hospitals, that shoots children in the head?

You mean a "rational" democracy that covets the land of others, invades nations, occupies their land and kills their people?