It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
www.guardian.co.uk...
"Stephen Walt, the academic dean of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, and John Mearsheimer, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, published two versions of the essay, the Israel Lobby, in the London Review of Books and on a Harvard website."
Originally posted by ThePieMaN
In another thread an Israeli soldier had stated that they should kick out all the Palestinians and put them behind the wall...3 more posts later and he replies to a member that was being critical 'I can tell you don't like Jews"
Why is it if you are critical of a countries Politics that immediately you are against their religion?
Originally posted by The Vagabond
The first few pages are rather unimpressive. The underlying point of US Support for Israel is clear, documented, and incontrovertable. The conclusions built thereupon, that Israel is the primary beneficiary, to the exclusion of the US, seems unlikely to be well substantiated. I have already begun to identify failures to acknowledge relevant facts and even a blatant post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy in relation to the effects of US policy.
Originally posted by The Vagabond
I haven't had a chance to read the entire thing, but for those of you who haven't noticed, I LOVE a good debate. I'm planning to compose a quite large, quite well documented response. Expect it to be finished within the month.
The first few pages are rather unimpressive. The underlying point of US Support for Israel is clear, documented, and incontrovertable. The conclusions built thereupon, that Israel is the primary beneficiary, to the exclusion of the US, seems unlikely to be well substantiated. I have already begun to identify failures to acknowledge relevant facts and even a blatant post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy in relation to the effects of US policy.
Originally posted by Seekerof
Having said that, and having read the longer version of their working paper by Harvard Kennedy School, I am of the belief that the paper contains an adequate and outright amount of half-truths, misconceptions, and misrepresentations that are undoubtedly uncharacteristic for such astute individuals in their respective academic fields of study. Further, most of what they have asserted in the form of half-truths, misconceptions, and misrepresentations 'fail the test', in respect to academic integrity and honest research, as well as not being balanced. In agreement, the unnamed gentleman that handles the first below linked site, agrees.
Further on this can be found here:
Stephen Walt's War with Israel
Will the real John Mearsheimer please stand up?
Furthermore, bear in mind that both are anti-war, in respect to the Iraq War, hence their stipulating that Israel was behind the US invading Iraq.
"An unnecessary war," Foreign Policy, Jan/Feb 2003
seekerof
[edit on 2-4-2006 by Seekerof]
Originally posted by iskander
Actually, just to make sure, in order to avoid further unnecessary complication and "loop hole" debate and false authority syndrome referencing, again I ask that if substantiates his/her opinions by referencing an outside souse, please check that the source is free of bias and other agendas.
Originally posted by iskander
Being of neutral political, religious and racial standing, I strongly support and applaud the initiative of Mr. Walt and Prof Mearsheimer, and find their logic to be free of hidden agendas.
...by referencing an outside souse, please check that the source is free of bias and other agendas.
Unfortunately this leads either to questions of SeekerOfs motives, or lack of diligence on his part.
Originally posted by iskanderHi seeker,
and let the mudslinging begin!
Yet again, as asked for in Springers "Effective IMMEDIATELY" post, as I have made my best effort to point out, let's be respectful of our gracious host, and lets NOT.
Again, I respectfully request that personal opinions regarding authors and forum members, characterisations, slander, bias, (including any and all references to outside sources of such) >etc< will be kept out of this discussion.
Vagabond is taking an absolutely correct approach and I'm looking forward to his findings.
Since then, U.S.-Israel strategic cooperation has continued to evolve. Today, these strategic ties are stronger than ever. To cite a few examples:
Because of its strategic location and its unquestionable reliability as an ally, the U.S. has found Israel to be an ideal place for training, maintenance, and prepositioning of material and supplies.
More than 300 Department of Defense personnel travel to Israel every month.
Joint military exercises are regularly held. Israel has had more extensive naval exercises with the U.S. than any other country in the Middle East and has conducted training exchanges with special American antiterrorist forces.
Israel's Haifa port has routinely been declared to be the best and most cost-effective facility of its kind in the region by senior Navy officials. Haifa receives approximately 40 U.S. Navy ships each year, hosting thousands of U.S. sailors and Marines.
Israel also makes other facilities available to the U.S. including hospitals, training areas, and bombing ranges in the Negev Desert. And most important, Israel is the only country in the area that the U.S. can truly rely on to provide open and unhindered access to its ports and facilities.
A Joint Anti-Terrorism Working Group was created.
A hotline was established between the Pentagon and the Israeli Defense Ministry.
A study found that Israel can help the United States in 13 of the 21 critical technological areas that the Pentagon has identified as vital to keeping American defenses strong. The U.S. continues to fund the research and development of Israeli weapons systems and military equipment including the Arrow missile, the Tactical High Energy Laser, the Barak ship self-defense missile system, Reactive Armor Tiles, Crash-Attenuating Seats, the Have-Nap missile and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.
Palesitnians terrorism is not a random violence directed against Israel or “the west“; it is largely a response to Israel's prolonged campaign to colonize the West Bank and Gaza
Washington would not be nearly as worried about Iran, Ba'thist Iraq, or Syria were it not closely tied to Israel.
Regarding Israeli settlement policies and the conflicts it causes with the US policy – As far as I recall, Israel is an independent state. Settlements have been an Israeli interest and therefore it is Israel that decides what to do within their domain.
Article 49
The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.
Originally posted by Malichai
Independent nation or not Israel does not have the right to transfer settlers to the occupied territories.
Originally posted by ThePieMaN
Back in 2004 AIPAC offices were raided by the FBI and computers were confiscated from a key AIPAC employee regarding leaked classified documents concerning the US Policy on Iran. I never heard about this again and was curious if anything came of this and if it has any relation to whats going on today with American stance towards Iran. Was this their intention to incite something like this?
After reading this article I was curious as to what happened afterwards.
www.commondreams.org