Does The Gov't Really Send $10 Million A Day To Isreal????

[msoprano]

according to my teacher today they govt sends the isrealian army $10 million a day...he says this is public information...

Anyone know this for sure or has a link for me....

then we talked about the withdrawal of isreal from the west bank and we concluded that if the money were true then the govt would simply cut isreal off and they would have to listen to what ever the govt says, so obviously bush is just doing his pr move by saying on tv how he wants isreal to withdraw

comments please

[o-jay®]

It's a little off but close. The U.S. government gives a over 3.5 billion in total aid on an annual basis to Israel. The majority of this is military aid. So if you break it down on a per day basis, 10 million a day is pretty close. But that's a combination of military and economic aid.

[doubtness]

But why are we giving aid to other countries, when we're having a shitload of problems that we need to deal with?

[o-jay®]

Originally posted by doubtness

But why are we giving aid to other countries, when we're having a shitload of problems that we need to deal with?

Oil and politics is my guess. I know it's not that simplistic, but it has a lot to do with it.

[msoprano]

Originally posted by o-jay®

It's a little off but close. The U.S. government gives a over 3.5 billion in total aid on an annual basis to Israel. The majority of this is military aid. So if you break it down on a per day basis, 10 million a day is pretty close. But that's a combination of military and economic aid.

so pretty much the theory is correct youre saying

[o-jay®]

Originally posted by msoprano13

so pretty much the theory is correct youre saying

Pretty much, 10 million a day is pretty close. I'm sure the government makes larger lump some payments as opposed to daily payments as we generally do with other countries, but that's what it breaks down to on a daily basis.

[msoprano]

Originally posted by o-jay®

Pretty much, 10 million a day is pretty close. I'm sure the government makes larger lump some payments as opposed to daily payments as we generally do with other countries, but that's what it breaks down to on a daily basis.

its good to see our tax paying dollars hard at work...lol

[dzadza]

10 million/day * 365 days = 3.65 billion/year. Pretty close.

[romy20]

Originally posted by doubtness

But why are we giving aid to other countries, when we're having a shitload of problems that we need to deal with?

yeah thats what I say too, wtf

but I guess its not that simple I dunno

[doubtness]

and now some of the Middle Eastern countries are going to stop exporting oil, because the US is supporting Israel, and it's going to cost us more $$$ in filling in the gas tank. Sigh...

[darcoleo]

If the US government would stop being a bunch of tree huggin hippies and start diggin in the Alaskan wildlife reserves, we'd be gettin our oil for a shitload than what we're paying now. There's more oil up there than in the rest of the United States, yet we can't dig up there because the Alaskan caribou needs a place to mate. Fuck.

[zygny]

a couple excerpts

"Most Americans are not aware how much of their tax revenue our government sends to Israel. For the fiscal year ending in September 30, 1997, the U.S. has given Israel $6.72 billion: $6.194 billion falls under Israel's foreign aid allotment and $526 million comes from agencies such as the Department of Commerce, the U.S. Information Agency and the Pentagon. The $6.72 billion figure does not include loan guarantees and annual compound interest totalling $3.122 billion the U.S. pays on money borrowed to give to Israel. It does not include the cost to U.S. taxpayers of IRS tax exemptions that donors can claim when they donate money to Israeli charities. (Donors claim approximately $1 billion in Federal tax deductions annually. This ultimately costs other U.S. tax payers $280 million to $390 million.)

When grant, loans, interest and tax deductions are added together for the fiscal year ending in September 30, 1997, our special relationship with Israel cost U.S. taxpayers over $10 billion.

Since 1949 the U.S. has given Israel a total of $83.205 billion. The interest costs borne by U.S. tax payers on behalf of Israel are $49.937 billion, thus making the total amount of aid given to Israel since 1949 $133.132 billion. This may mean that U.S. government has given more federal aid to the average Israeli citizen in a given year than it has given to the average American citizen."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" "The U.S. aid relationship with Israel is unlike any other in the world," said Stephen Zunes during a January 26 CPAP presentation. "In sheer volume, the amount is the most generous foreign aid program ever between any two countries," added Zunes, associate professor of Politics and chair of the Peace and Justice Studies Program at the University of San Francisco.

He explored the strategic reasoning behind the aid, asserting that it parallels the "needs of American arms exporters" and the role "Israel could play in advancing U.S. strategic interests in the region."

Although Israel is an "advanced, industrialized, technologically sophisticated country," it "receives more U.S. aid per capita annually than the total annual [Gross Domestic Product] per capita of several Arab states." Approximately a third of the entire U.S. foreign aid budget goes to Israel, "even though Israel comprises just . . . one-thousandth of the world's total population, and already has one of the world's higher per capita incomes."

U.S. government officials argue that this money is necessary for "moral" reasons-some even say that Israel is a "democracy battling for its very survival." If that were the real reason, however, aid should have been highest during Israel's early years, and would have declined as Israel grew stronger. Yet "the pattern . . . has been just the opposite." According to Zunes, "99 percent of all U.S. aid to Israel took place after the June 1967 war, when Israel found itself more powerful than any combination of Arab armies . . ."

The U.S. supports Israel's dominance so it can serve as "a surrogate for American interests in this vital strategic region." "Israel has helped defeat radical nationalist movements" and has been a "testing ground for U.S. made weaponry." Moreover, the intelligence agencies of both countries have "collaborated," and "Israel has funneled U.S. arms to third countries that the U.S. [could] not send arms to directly, . . . Iike South Africa, like the Contras, Guatemala under the military junta, [and] Iran." Zunes cited an Israeli analyst who said: "'It's like Israel has just become another federal agency when it's convenient to use and you want something done quietly."' Although the strategic relationship between the United States and the Gulf Arab states in the region has been strengthening in recent years, these states "do not have the political stability, the technological sophistication, [or] the number of higher-trained armed forces personnel" as does Israel.

Matti Peled, former Israeli major general and Knesset member, told Zunes that he and most Israeli generals believe this aid is "little more than an American subsidy to U.S. arms manufacturers," considering that the majority of military aid to Israel is used to buy weapons from the U.S. Moreover, arms to Israel create more demand for weaponry in Arab states. According to Zunes, "the Israelis announced back in 1991 that they supported the idea of a freeze in Middle East arms transfers, yet it was the United States that rejected it."

In the fall of 1993-when many had high hopes for peace-78 senators wrote to former President Bill Clinton insisting that aid to Israel remain "at current levels." Their "only reason" was the "massive procurement of sophisticated arms by Arab states." The letter neglected to mention that 80 percent of those arms to Arab countries came from the U.S.

"I'm not denying for a moment the power of AIPAC [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee], the pro-Israel lobby," and other similar groups, Zunes said. Yet the "Aerospace Industry Association which promotes these massive arms shipments . . . is even more influential." This association has given two times more money to campaigns than all of the pro-Israel groups combined. Its "force on Capitol Hill, in terms of lobbying, surpasses that of even AIPAC." Zunes asserted that the "general thrust of U.S. policy would be pretty much the same even if AIPAC didn't exist. We didn't need a pro-Indonesia lobby to support Indonesia in its savage repression of East Timor all these years." This is a complex issue, and Zunes said that he did not want to be "conspiratorial," but he asked the audience to imagine what "Palestinian industriousness, Israeli technology, and Arabian oil money . . . would do to transform the Middle East. . . . [W]hat would that mean to American arms manufacturers? Oil companies? Pentagon planners?"

"An increasing number of Israelis are pointing out" that these funds are not in Israel's best interest. Quoting Peled, Zunes said, "this aid pushes Israel 'toward a posture of callous intransigence' in terms of the peace process." Moreover, for every dollar the U.S. sends in arms aid, Israel must spend two to three dollars to train people to use the weaponry, to buy parts, and in other ways make use of the aid. Even "main-stream Israeli economists are saying [it] is very harmful to the country's future."

The Israeli paper Yediot Aharonot described Israel as "'the godfather's messenger' since [israel] undertake the 'dirty work' of a godfather who 'always tries to appear to be the owner of some large, respectable business."' Israeli satirist B. Michael refers to U.S. aid this way: "'My master gives me food to eat and I bite those whom he tells me to bite. It's called strategic cooperation." 'To challenge this strategic relationship, one cannot focus solely on the Israeli lobby but must also examine these "broader forces as well." "Until we tackle this issue head-on," it will be "very difficult to win" in other areas relating to Palestine.

"The results" of the short-term thinking behind U.S. policy "are tragic," not just for the "immediate victims" but "eventually [for] Israel itself" and "American interests in the region." The U.S. is sending enormous amounts of aid to the Middle East, and yet "we are less secure than ever"-both in terms of U.S. interests abroad and for individual Americans. Zunes referred to a "growing and increasing hostility [of] the average Arab toward the United States." In the long term, said Zunes, "peace and stability and cooperation with the vast Arab world is far more important for U.S. interests than this alliance with Israel."

This is not only an issue for those who are working for Palestinian rights, but it also "jeopardizes the entire agenda of those of us concerned about human rights, concerned about arms control, concerned about international law." Zunes sees significant potential in "building a broad-based movement around it." "

[karch]

Originally posted by doubtness

and now some of the Middle Eastern countries are going to stop exporting oil, because the US is supporting Israel, and it's going to cost us more $$$ in filling in the gas tank. Sigh...

My Econometrics professor used to work for OPEC. ANd he was going buck wild today saying everyone blames OPEC for higher prices, but it's infact the US's fault especially of the past few years because of the oil refineries and ports in the US. Which is true.

[karch]

By the way MSOPRANO interesting fact. Although I knew US gave about 3.5 Billion in foreign aid to ISrael. It's amazing when you think about it, that it's 10 million dollars a day. And infact I read that US gives more foreign aid to ISrael then to the whole sub-sahara Africa. And I think the people living in Africa need that money 100 times more then Israel does. People complain about us giving up all this foreign aid. It's not the fact that we give it up... it's where we are giving it to.