U.S. Doubles Aid to Israel's Defense Systems

Link.

The United States will double the special aid it gives Israel for the development and implementation of anti-missile systems, the Globes financial newspaper reported on Thursday.

According to the report, the House and Senate’s Committees on Appropriations approved the aid following a request by the U.S. Administration to approve aid totaling $106.1 million for the Arrow 3 anti-ballistic long-range air defense system, for the program to improve the basic capabilities of the Arrow systems, and for the David’s Sling mid-range anti-missile system.

Both Appropriations Committees went far beyond the request, the report noted, and raised the amount of aid from $129 million to $235.7 million in 2012, Globes noted. The report is based on information first published on the Inside Defense website.

As proven in the six day war, attacking the enemy is far better than waiting for them to attack, as in the Yom Kippur war! Defence systems are all very well, but attacking (especially covertly) can remove the need for such systems if the threat is eliminated. The enemy only understands violence and defeat. So give them both.

There's a "string" attached, the aid must be spent on American goods, AND THEN, Israel can do America's DIRTY work. Gee, the mendacity of the "appearance" of alterism, and all along Israel gives life saving medical research, computer science, developments, and sophisticated covert intelligence!

As and American I have prayed for and supported Israel for longer than I can remember. Israel is God's chosen people and does great things some of which your mentioned. (But) your attitude stinks and will earn Israel nothing of any value. As long as the USA supports Israel give respect where respect is due. It is Israel that is the center of the Muslim attention and with American help will have some security in the technology and help provided. America has taken care of itself pretty well.

Preparation for an Iranian campaign?

I can't think of a worse use of our money at this point.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I can't think of a worse use of our money at this point.

I think it's just a ploy to appeal to the right for a re-election resume.

Where are the origins of this request? How often does the Israeli government ask for aid? How often will it get an opportunity to pass by the White House for a sig or veto? How often is something like this occurring right around a presidential reelection?

Originally posted by dadudemon
I think it's just a ploy to appeal to the right for a re-election resume.

Where are the origins of this request? How often does the Israeli government ask for aid? How often will it get an opportunity to pass by the White House for a sig or veto? How often is something like this occurring right around a presidential reelection?

I think the real issue is the appropriations committee giving them even more than they asked for (though for all I know that's standard in international relations).

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I think the real issue is the appropriations committee giving them even more than they asked for (though for all I know that's standard in international relations).

Well, I snapped into a slim-jim before I replied so I know my thoughts are organized.

Basically, the GOP voters were criticizing Obama about being weak on support for Israel. Conveniently, Obama is getting a chance to prove them "wrong".

I'm pretty sure this all goes back to the White House. Every president does this shit to get elected a second time. I could be wrong, of course but it seems waaaaaaaay to coincidental.

"You're anti-israel and you're weak with supporting one of my allies!"

"I signed a missile defense bill for them that gave them more money than they asked for. You were saying?"

Originally posted by dadudemon
"You're anti-israel and you're weak with supporting one of my allies!"

"I signed a missile defense bill for them that gave them more money than they asked for. You were saying?"

What the average Republican/Neo-Con/Rightist/Tea-Bagger would think but not say to that follow-up question: "Yeah, but you're still a n!gger."

Though 236mil seems like nothing for a missile defense system.

What the average Republican/Neo-Con/Rightist/Tea-Bagger would think but not say to that follow-up question: "Yeah, but you're still a n!gger."

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
I ****ing wish. If leftists' fantasies about Republican racism were all true, you have no idea how much fonder of the Republican party I would be.

Unfortunately it's not a "fantasy", the bigotry exist, get your head out of the sand.

As far as you being such a proponent of racism, that's just sad, man.

Originally posted by Robtard
What the average Republican/Neo-Con/Rightist/Tea-Bagger would think but not say to that follow-up question: "Yeah, but you're still a n!gger."

Then Obama would say, "Yeah, but black men are still higher up the social ladder than white women. Ain't that right, Hillary? BOOYA!"

Originally posted by Robtard
Though 236mil seems like nothing for a missile defense system.

You must be rich.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You must be rich.

Unfortunately no, but the "for a missile defense system" part was important.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I think it's just a ploy to appeal to the right for a re-election resume.

Where are the origins of this request? How often does the Israeli government ask for aid? How often will it get an opportunity to pass by the White House for a sig or veto? How often is something like this occurring right around a presidential reelection?

Originally posted by Grate the Vraya
It didn't even mention the president.

The article does not need to mention the president because we already know know that all bills passed in the house and senate go back...

Originally posted by dadudemon
...to the White House for a sig or veto...

And bills can be heavily influenced or even pushed by the President in the US. Remember the bailout legislation and how Obama was pushing for it to get passed? He demanded a "bill on my desk" before a certain date to be signed.

Originally posted by Robtard
Unfortunately no, but the "for a missile defense system" part was important.

Unfortunately no, but the "you must be rich" part which referenced the entire statement "Though 236mil seems like nothing for a missile defense system" was important. You'd have to know how much a MDS costs and then think of 236 million dollars as nothing.

Originally posted by dadudemon
The article does not need to mention the president because we already know know that all bills passed in the house and senate go back...

And bills can be heavily influenced or even pushed by the President in the US. Remember the bailout legislation and how Obama was pushing for it to get passed? He demanded a "bill on my desk" before a certain date to be signed.

Unfortunately no, but the "you must be rich" part which referenced the entire statement "Though 236mil seems like nothing for a missile defense system" was important. You'd have to know how much a MDS costs and then think of 236 million dollars as nothing.

Originally posted by Grate the Vraya
Yeah, yeah, yeah, frankly I'm against the president having so much control over congress as it seriously ****s up the balance of power, but that's beside the point. What evidence is there that the president was pushing for a doubling of the amount of money going to Israel? I mean, sure he didn't veto it but that's a weak defense for your claim that he was essentially behind the increase. All that proves is that he was okay with it, which doesn't show that he's all gung-ho for supporting Israel, but rather that he just isn't against it.

That's what I was asking for:

Originally posted by dadudemon
Where are the origins of this request? How often does the Israeli government ask for aid? How often will it get an opportunity to pass by the White House for a sig or veto? How often is something like this occurring right around a presidential reelection?

Those are the items I need to connect the dots. It seems too convenient to the incumbent president. Obama gets a massive blacklash for his non-zionist approach to Israel and he suddenly gets the opportunity to prove his support with a nice large sum of money? You'll find that such coincidences are hardly coincidences on Capitol Hill. These not conspiracies: it is just good politics. Obama would be an idiot to not support that bill...well, at least if he wants to be reelected. If it were Ron Paul in the White House, he wouldn't sign it (lol).

If you want to believe that Obama was not involved with this bill, you can.

But let's just google search, shall we? BRB

It's in the very article posted in the opening post.

"According to the report, the House and Senate’s Committees on Appropriations approved the aid [b]following a request by the U.S. Administration to approve aid[b] totaling $106.1 million for the Arrow 3 anti-ballistic long-range air defense system, for the program to improve the basic capabilities of the Arrow systems, and for the David’s Sling mid-range anti-missile system.

Both Appropriations Committees went far beyond the request, the report noted, and raised the amount of aid from $129 million to $235.7 million in 2012, Globes noted. The report is based on information first published on the Inside Defense website."

So it's right there: the Obama Administration requested the bill get started.

Double edit -

It's right here, as well:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf

Apparently, Obama approved/pushed $3 billion in support...not just the Arrow 3 system.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Unfortunately no, but the "you must be rich" part which referenced the entire statement "Though 236mil seems like nothing for a missile defense system" was important. You'd have to know how much a MDS costs and then think of 236 million dollars as nothing.

Incorrect again. I know a single F-22 cost about 150mil(FA cost), so considering that, an entire missile defense system for less than the price of two F-22s does seem like a small amount.

But I suspect your motives here are spawned due the the other thread. Oh well, old wounds, eh.

Originally posted by Grate the Vraya
As for the act itself, Iran has been found to be building nuclear weapons, and they don't seem to be deterred whatsoever by economic sanctions. Israel is our ally and the United States fought in WWII partially in order to establish Israel as a sovereign nation. To recant on that, even in the face of an economic crisis is weak and foolish in the long run, because Israel is one of our closest allies. It hurts economically, and I know that that's the main concern that determines whether a president gets reelected or not, but I think that it's the right thing to do either way, and I don't consider myself a republican or a conservative at all.

I have a hard time seeing it as the "right" thing to do. From a position of realpolitik its the practical thing to do. You can't turn your back on an ally and expect the others not to take notice. Morally, however, and in the long term pragmatically, Israel is a rather exploitative and militaristic ally.

Israel is that friend you never go clubbing with because you just know he'll get bumped into, freak out and glass someone in the face.

And you know you'll have to step in and help him when the guy's buddies start swarming.

Originally posted by Robtard
Incorrect again. I know a single F-22 cost about 150mil(FA cost), so considering that, an entire missile defense system for less than the price of two F-22s does seem like a small amount.

But I suspect your motives here are spawned due the the other thread. Oh well, old wounds, eh.

Originally posted by Robtard
Incorrect again. I know a single F-22 cost about 150mil(FA cost), so considering that, an entire missile defense system for less than the price of two F-22s does seem like a small amount.

But I suspect your motives here are spawned due the the other thread. Oh well, old wounds, eh.

You say "an entire missile defense system" when missile defense systems are not nearly as complicated or technology rich as an F-22. They track heat signatures and fire super fast rockets to intercept and destroy. That's just one of the many technologies in the F-22. 🙂 If you consider that the US appropriated..what...$30 billion for our own Missile Defense system, then the $235 million seems to be inappropriately high: our land area and border distances are waaaaaaaaay more than israel's. In other words, when you said the following:

"Though 236mil seems like nothing for a missile defense system."

You were either very rich or did not know that that was an expensive price-tag for such a small country on a MDS.

And not sure why you want to make things personal. Did "focus4chumps" get to you? Don't listen to him: I was not after your chicken nuggets.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Aren't F-22s also not very cost-effective as well?

Indeed.