rmgill Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 A topic about Egyptian unrest becomes an excuse to poke Israel? Sure, all problems in the world can be attributed to three origins. The British, the US, or Israel. No one else in the world, not the rest of Europe, not the locals penchant for corruption or the various Communist/Socialist movements share ANY blame.
Rod Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Israel's aid is now Military. The civilian assistance has been phased out and the military (FMS) portion increased, especially to compensate for inflation in weapon's prices. About 75% has to be spent in the U.S. Many in Israel are also in agreement that as Israel has become richer it no longer is dependent on US military aid and without such aid it can have more "independence" in its policies (something which I disagree as Israel still needs US political backing in the UNSC). For Egypt the equation is interesting. They cannot afford to become another Iran and belligerent, They would lose access to the American export markets through the QIZ (as long as Israeli-made zippers are included in clothes, they can enter the US tariff-free). Also forget about tourism and more important easy terms for U.S. wheat and grains. Egypt is highly dependent on food imports and adding another million mouths to feed every 9 months. As for turning to Russia or China to replace U.S. weapons systems they are not as cheap as they used to be. Bottom line Egypt is a mess whomever takes power.
Tim the Tank Nut Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 A topic about Egyptian unrest becomes an excuse to poke Israel? It's a Muslim tradition...
Rod Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Rumors that police and the army are clashing....this should be interesting. If anything a military junta will take over and send Mubarak packing. The people "still" respect the Army, not so the Internal Security Services.
Rod Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Tonight is the Sabbath and I won't have access to TV, Internet, etc... Will I wake up in the AM to see the Miami Herald with a page of Mubarak is in Egypt. Army in Control?
JOE BRENNAN Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Israel's aid is now Military. About 75% has to be spent in the U.S. For Egypt the equation is interesting. Israel isn't directly relevant to whether the Egyptian public is fed up with Mubarak, agreed. However just for the record, again, the fact that the US taxpayer gives money to Israel is the central economic fact of that aid. The fact that the money mainly has to be spent in the US is nearly irrelevant economically, though a clever political twist, and as we know some people will argue till the cows come home that it somehow *does* make a big economic difference where money the US govt *gives* somebody, *taken* from US taxpayers (sooner or later), is spent. But, I'm forced to write you a check for $1,000 or go to jail. You have to spend that money at businesses in my town as opposed to anywhere else. I should be how happy about that restriction on your spending of my money, compared to not having to give you my money?...common sense says not much, and any Economics 101 professor (who is qualified to teach) will tell that's the right answer in economic theory as well. There's no complicated voodoo in economics that somehow undoes common sense. The economics of aid to Israel are simple: we're giving them a lot of money in return for basically nothing economically. The reason to continue is only if it gives us enough of something other than directly economic value (security, doing the right thing, etc). Politicians often hoodwink the public on this idea that govt spending, of various kinds, is 'just circulating around', so it's kinda like we're not spending it...BS. As partly summarized in earlier post, Egypt has a 'not bad' economy especially in recent years though it can't possibly be compared to Israel, or the US, in that respect. It's had solid growth from more diversified sources. It's not hand to mouth as a whole, and substantially less so that it used to be. But the world doesn't revolve around GDP's or growth rates expressed as averages per person. *That* is true in every country. First of all it matters a lot who gets what piece of the pie and how. Second, human affairs don't revolve solely around economics at all. Just the fact that countries like Egypt repress expression, and give favors to a special connected class, really pisses people off as their expectations rise. And better economic performance of the country can actually raise expectations faster. Of course Egypt could easily screw up its economy with prolonged unrest, and some new govt could do a much worse job on economics than the Mubarak regime has. Joe
m1a1mg Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 BBC News has a very good live feed on their website.
Rod Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Twitter reports (don't know how factual they are) are coming in saying Israel is evacuating its Embassy, staff and families. Not a bad idea. The U.S. should do the same for all non-essential personnel and have Delta Force ready just in case they need to do an "Eagle's Claw Part Deux" (well this time we have V-22 Ospreys....)
Rod Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) From these pics it seems that there is no way back and Mubarak is finished: http://blogs.sacbee.com/photos/2011/01/rioting-and-chaos-engulfs-egyp.html#mi_rss=The%20Frame it Edited January 28, 2011 by Rod
X-Files Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Here come the "tanks" Egypt's military has deployed troops and tanks on the streets of cities torn by a day of rioting and chaos that has challenged the legitimacy of the thirty year old regime of Hosni Mubarak, the country's president.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8289301/Egypt-protests-military-deploys-as-sun-sets-to-enforce-curfew-on-countrys-burning-streets.html
Kenneth P. Katz Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Oh joy, I can hardly wait for the Muslim Brotherhood to rule the most important Arab state. And my joy is multiplied many times since the United States is both broke and governed by a feckless administration. The fun has just begun.
Gregory Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Israel's aid is now Military. The civilian assistance has been phased out and the military (FMS) portion increased, especially to compensate for inflation in weapon's prices. About 75% has to be spent in the U.S. Many in Israel are also in agreement that as Israel has become richer it no longer is dependent on US military aid and without such aid it can have more "independence" in its policies (something which I disagree as Israel still needs US political backing in the UNSC). I think one can be separated from the other quite easily. US can provide iron-clad UN backing for Israel while phasing out military aid over the next few years. A UN veto is worth a lot more then $3B to Israel.
Cyber_Ghost Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 I think one can be separated from the other quite easily. US can provide iron-clad UN backing for Israel while phasing out military aid over the next few years. A UN veto is worth a lot more then $3B to Israel.No, you can't... the UN is a toothless dog, the military aid on the other hand can hurt Israel quite badly, simply because it means that we will either have to spend another 3Bil USD (around 10Bil shekels, 25% of the defence budget), or cut the defence spending during a time of instability which is not an option. This gives the US strong leavrage on Israel in the long run.
savantu Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) So Saudi Arabia is when ? Or Libya ? The democratization of the arab states and fight for human rights will be the biggest blow to Islamic terrorism. Listen to the people. The regimes might delay this, but their end is inevitable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqEsmNjMwkA&feature=player_embedded# Edited January 28, 2011 by savantu
Gregory Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 No, you can't... the UN is a toothless dog, the military aid on the other hand can hurt Israel quite badly, simply because it means that we will either have to spend another 3Bil USD (around 10Bil shekels, 25% of the defence budget), or cut the defence spending during a time of instability which is not an option. This gives the US strong leavrage on Israel in the long run. Well...we kind of need this money too, so perhaps Israel should invest more money into nukes. First tank rolls over the border, and Assuan Dam gets it.
urbanoid Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) Quite a few of pics from the riots: http://totallycoolpix.com/2011/01/the-egypt-protests/ Edited January 28, 2011 by urbanoid
X-Files Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 More here - who is the oriental kid in the 'Where's Waldo?' red-and-white t-shirt?http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/01/25/day_of_rage?page=0,31
Gregory Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 So Saudi Arabia is when ? Or Libya ? The democratization of the arab states and fight for human rights will be the biggest blow to Islamic terrorism. Listen to the people. The regimes might delay this, but their end is inevitable. Yes - except they are likely to be replaced by more broadly based but equally illiberal regimes.
Cyber_Ghost Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Well...we kind of need this money too, so perhaps Israel should invest more money into nukes. First tank rolls over the border, and Assuan Dam gets it.What I'm saying is that this aid buys you something as well. I do think that without it, and thus without aid to Egypt, the IDF will become even stronger.It will also free the IDF to buy from other markets and enable us to sell to some markets that are currently closed to us (AWACS to china?).
Rod Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Could the guy who burned himself in Tunisia would had ever imagined that his self-immolation led to the fall of the Tunisian autocratic government and possibly Egypt's might Mubarak?
Rod Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Rumors or unrest spreading to Syria, but given how the current Assad's father dealt a similar situation in Hama in the early 80s, I think few are willing to go at it again.
urbanoid Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 What I'm saying is that this aid buys you something as well. I do think that without it, and thus without aid to Egypt, the IDF will become even stronger.It will also free the IDF to buy from other markets and enable us to sell to some markets that are currently closed to us (AWACS to china?). Then don't get surprised if Israeli hi-tech stuff appears in Iran and/or other "Israel-friendly" countries. Are those few bucks worth it?
JOE BRENNAN Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) 1. What I'm saying is that this aid buys you something as well. 2. I do think that without it, and thus without aid to Egypt, the IDF will become even stronger.It will also free the IDF to buy from other markets and enable us to sell to some markets that are currently closed to us (AWACS to china?).1. Yes it does, or might be reasonably argued so. My only point is that the old standby 'but it has to be spend 75% in the US' as if that means US taxpayers aren't really paying a large slice of the Israeli defense budget, is basically BS. 2. But that sounds like of like blackmail. I think the better argument is that 'aid to Israel promotes peace in the long run', not trying to pretend that amounts spent in the US aren't really costing the US money, which is economic nonsense, and surely not making threats about what Israel will do if it doesn't get the money. Personally, I think the US-Israel relationship is important but Israel is (far) more than a rich enough country to pay for its own defense entirely by itself. And the US does buck a lot of international pressure to keep vetoing anti-Israel moves in UN, which would in fact affect Israel, because it also goes along with US lobby against more pressure on Israel to make more concessions to the Palestinians even in 'friendly' parts of the world like Europe. The idea that the US has to pay Israel $bils per year not to increase the military capabilities of US adversaries is unreasonable, IMO. Joe Edited January 28, 2011 by JOE BRENNAN
Cyber_Ghost Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 1. Yes it does, or might be reasonably argued so. My only point is that the old standby 'but it has to be spend 75% in the US' as if that means US taxpayers aren't really paying a large slice of the Israeli defense budget, is basically BS. 2. But that sounds like of like blackmail. I think the better argument is that 'aid to Israel promotes peace in the long run', not trying to pretend that amounts spent in the US aren't really costing the US money, which is economic nonsense, and surely not making threats about what Israel will do if it doesn't get the money. Personally, I think the US-Israel relationship is important but Israel is (far) more than a rich enough country to pay for its own defense entirely by itself. And the US does buck a lot of international pressure to keep vetoing anti-Israel moves in UN, which would in fact affect Israel, because it also goes along with US lobby against more pressure on Israel to make more concessions to the Palestinians even in 'friendly' parts of the world like Europe. The idea that the US has to pay Israel $bils per year not to increase the military capabilities of US adversaries is unreasonable, IMO. JoeI was voicing some of the opinions on this subjects. If you ask me, I'd do away with the aid, take away all money given to unproductive elements of the Israeli society, cut off the tax breaks to the upper class. That way we can both compensate for the budget decrease and make the leeches work.
Exel Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 So Saudi Arabia is when ? Or Libya ? The democratization of the arab states and fight for human rights will be the biggest blow to Islamic terrorism. Listen to the people. The regimes might delay this, but their end is inevitable. Except of course the fact that democratic forces in these countries are in a far weaker position to fill the resulting power vacuum than various Islamist groups. The odds are high that the end state will have more resemblance with the Iranian revolution than the French. Muslim Brotherhood is not a democratic movement by any stretch of imagination, it is staunchly fascist. Islamofascist. I by no means oppose democratic reform and the toppling of corrupt authoritarian regimes, but we have to acknowledge the dangers involved. In the long term this may be a good thing, but in the short term it may lead to a massive tide of anti-liberal and West-hating Islamism. Muslim Brotherhood & Co. are after all the most well-organized opposition movements in these countries.
Recommended Posts