Tempest12

Welcome!

Hello, Tempest12, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- Longhair 14:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Answer

Yep, that's one way to do it. You can also just click the little plus tab beside the edit tab, and that will automatically add a new comment to the bottom of the page. СПУТНИК^{ССС Р} 12:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:Question

Yes, I'm of the opinion that the aid should continue. The $3 billion that the US gives directly to Israel annually is not as taxing on the US budget as it may seem (being less than %1 of the US budget and about 5% of Israel's), and there are other reasons, which, combined, make the aid worthwhile:

1. Israel is the US's foremost ally and is the only country (except Micronesia?) who questions almost none of the US foreign policies. Especially because the US foreign image is as low as it is, the US needs a powerful ally in the Middle East, where it's conducting its military operations now. I know that factors within the US try to present the US as a neutral world police, which should act similarly towards all coutries, but the US is not supposed to be the UN (which is, IMO, a corrupt organization which should be replaced by a more adept body), and does need allies.
2. Adding to the above, the US has received a lot of help from Israel which you don't often hear about. For instance, Israel is able to sell arms to countries which the US wants to sell arms to, but can't because of PR concerns. Also Israeli and US intelligence agencies often collaborate, and Israel passes intelligence to the US. Many otherwise secret military technologies developed by Israel make their way into the US, such as the Arrow missile, and others are co-developed by the two countries.
3. Adding more to the above, Israel acts as a frontier for the US in the Middle East. Just to give an example, it would've been much harder for the US to invade Iraq if Israel had not existed, due to the fact that Arab states are all opposed to the invasion, and might've sent more fighters over the border to Iraq to aid Saddam.

There are probably other reasons I don't know about, but the notion that the Jewish lobby or AIPAC is the main cause for the aid is ludicrous. Yes, the Jewish vote does make a difference, but there are other influentrial voter blocks which are mostly anti-Israeli. For instance, the university student block (which makes me sad, but that's just my opinion). I also seriously doubt that either of the two main US political parties would bow down to organizations which are only one in thousands of factors which could influence the vote.

And no, I don't have any sources off-hand as I have no special interest in the topic. Even if the US decides to cut off its aid, I'm sure I won't starve to death and our military will probably remain as strong as ever. I just hope that if such a time comes, a socialist like Amir Peretz won't be anywhere close to ruling the economy...

-- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 14:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed your question and have a couple of minutes to add my two cents you might be able to develop, hope you don't mind. Sorry no references.

I would rather see Israel wean it's way off the military and humanitarian US aid. Some reasons, not really in order of importance:

• Israel is subservient to the mighty US patron. When the US swings it's baton, Israel sits quietly, especially if the US adds more one-time aid/bribes (good example: First Iraqi war Israeli appeasement rewarded handsomely). But when Israel wants(wanted) to do something it deems important (at various times in the past), like expand settlements or trade with China/India, the US threatens with cutting aid, and Israel usually surrendered.

• 'dependance' on military aid. Bad for local economy. Since a large part of the combined aid must be spent in the US, a lot of purchasing has moved from local Israeli companies. Many examples: Lavi jet fighter, armaments, military spare parts, textiles, food, etc... The Merkava MBT weapons system is also constantly in danger of getting cut and Israel moving to abrams tanks, therby throwing thousands of Israelis out of work when the supplying factories lose their biggest customer, and then sending more non-military purchasing overseas.

• requirement to buy american - while Israel/US relations are unarguably close, Israel could be able to attract better relations with other countries if they purchased from them as well. Instead of buying so many American trucks, Israel could be purchasing French vehicules and winning more 'affection' and [at least superficial] 'amour' from them.

• In 2005, Israel is reported to have achieved a phenomenal 10-30 billion shekel surplus. Instead of using that by requiring government ministries to buy home-made products, the imports continue.

• continued aid keeps the large purchasing/transfer bureaucracy in place. Allows pockets to be padded, senior people rewarded, junior people groomed to be rewarded and hidden corruption to continue.

On the other hand, some pro-aid claims:

• the amount of aid money attracts the attention of US congreesspeople looking to have it spent in their districts and have jobs created/sustained. Makes otherwise non-interested politicians 'pro'-Israel.

I suggest slowly decreasing this dependance. Going 'Cold Turkey' would be harsh, but Israel should watch out for the day that the US itself decides to stop the money flowing. --Shuki 20:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Please help

Hello Tempest12. Thanks for your message in regards to the anonymous editor vandalising your user page. I have placed your user page on my watchlist and will attempt to curb this vandal in their tracks should they return. This ip address has also been blocked in the past see here for similar reasons. As I wasn't online at the time of your message, you may wish to make a note of Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism which is used to quickly notify administrators that intervention may be required if this continues to occur. -- Longhair 00:02, 29 April 2006 (UTC)