Ultimately our relationship with israel comes down to power and control.
The west arbitrarily decided that a Jewish state was the right course of action for a people that had long been demonized and subjected to unwarrented hardships.
After the fact, right or wrong became irrelevant.
Does Israel share intelligence with us. Of course they do.
Do wealth jews excercise all the influence at their disposal to shape foreign policy? of course they do.
Our safety is not at all tied to the protection of Israel (directly),but we(the west) made a decision, once a decision has been made...there aint no goin back.
Those numerous quotes reflect US policy toward Isreal over the last 30+ years. Its not nothing by any measure. You might find the words hollow, or wrong, but our policy has been reflected in these words from presidents, democrat and republican alike for over a generation.
But hey, morons like Carter, Reagan, Bush 41, and Clinton... they are nothing compared to the intellectual might in an internet sports forum. Reminds me of a quote:
Vizzini: "I can't compete with you physically, and you're no match for my brains."
Man in Black: "You're that smart?"
Vizzini: "Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Man in Black: "Yes."
I think it would be hard to come out and specify why Isreal is so important to us strategically, for the backlash that would ensue.
My understanding from colleagues who had jobs more important than mine was that Isreal shares information with us on terrosist networks, intelligence, among other things as yet unspecified. The way it was described to me was that we basically use them as a buffer to project our interests in the Middle East, given we have had common interests over these decades. Specifically against Lebanon, Palestinian terrorists, Iran, Iraq, and Syria, Iran again, and after Beirut in 1983, that relationship solidified even more.
Take that for what its worth. I take all of that with a grain of salt, since I have little means to verify any of that, and even less desire to do so, for the attention it would attract. I try to read up on the subject, but I find everythnig I read is slanted one way or the other, and objectivity is near impossible to find on this issue. Therefore, its hard for me to know exactly what to think or feel on the subject.
You said in the bolded that your defense was not what I stated, i.e. that you believe that Israel is of strategic importance because our leaders say it is; and then in the next bolded go on to say that very thing. I also find it funny that you say that I (singular form) "don't know something", i.e. top secret intelligence regarding Israel's strategic importance... well... do you?
Unless you do have such knowledge (and thus could share it) then we are both ignorant as to that information, which means neither of us can use it to support our opinions.
And the word opinion is was very deliberate there. I'm not trying to single-handedly change US policy from an internet forum, I'm stating my opinion and asking a simple question, one that we are now 2 pages deep in this thread and has yet to be answered:
Why specifically is Israel vital to our strategic security?
No one can answer that other than some weapons were developed by the Israelis and the below:
So, why do you think Israel is vital to our strategic security, other than our politicians tell us they are (specifics please)?
Now I realize that if we have all this access to oil reserves, it does help the pocket of the consumer. But the degree to which it helps our pockets vs business owner pockets is not even in the same league. And also, look, I like money too, I want to save money too, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to wipe out scores of people, or oppress entire populations in order to keep that money in my pockets.
If I in fact have strategic intelligence information that is limited in whose eyes can see it, then I cannot state it. So, there would be no answer given.
If I rely upon people of rank who state that we have a strategic benefit, but they cannot state specifics for the above given reasons, no specific answer can be given.
In fact, your argument comes down to either a purely isolationist definition of strategic interest, which has been shown to fail as a strategy, or an anti-Israel position, veiled in an argument that is not your real argument, or, something else that you don't care to state.
In any case, your entire position is one that denies me some basic information, or fails to explain to my ability to understand what it is that you are really saying. In any case, it makes no sense to me. The sole exception would be an allegation that we have no strategic interests in the Middle East at all, which brings us back to isolation. If you believe our strategic interests are limited to those of the Monroe Doctrine, or even more restrictive, than we have no commonality of understanding, and, therefore no further reason to discuss this issue. If you do believe we have a strategic interest beyond those outlined in the Monroe Doctrine, then your denial of boots on the ground intelligence and statement of people in authority make no sense to me.
Your challenge of specifics is by its very nature sophistry, because, in no way would I be allowed to answer your question, and you know it.
Additionally, I am going on the assumption you are not a person with Top Secret or confidential strategic security information and thus are free to divulge whatever reasons you have why Israel is of strategic value. It seems to me that you are arguing that you either are a secret agent for the US and cannot divulge your reasons, or you don't have access to the required information; which leads me to ask why you believe they are of strategic value without proof?
As for the isolation bit, it seems you are narrowing our involvement in Middle Eastern affairs to only 2 possible scenarios: Support Israel to this degree or practice a completely isolationist approach. I believe there are several other possible ways to interact with the Middle East than only the 2 you present.
Am I correct in assuming that the reason you support our alliance with Israel is based on A). The boots on the ground intelligence they provide to the US and B). that said boots on ground intelligence counter balances the negative effects of such alliance, and C) that part B is confirmed by our Presidents endorsement of the alliance?
Second. Israel has been the most stable allied government in the area. They are now and have been our best source of intelligence in the area for a very long time. We have nothing close. You can argue we should, but as of now, we don't.
My statements about intelligence sourcing was in response to your question about strategic value. I do not care to argue any more about the value of this intelligence because you and I seem to not have the same understanding of its value.
I never said Israel is the only source of intelligence, just the best and most reliable.
I do not now nor have I ever said anything that is a complete defense of all Israel has done, but in all honesty, I can make the same statement about my wife. And no, I will not expand on that statement.
As for why I support our alliance with Israel. It is in some ways the same reason why I supported our intervention in Kosovo. If I have to explain beyond that, then you will either never choose to agree, or, in the alternative, understand.
"Additionally, I am going on the assumption you are not a person with Top Secret or confidential strategic security information and thus are free to divulge whatever reasons you have why Israel is of strategic value."
The US has picked one side, on who they are allied with, and are sticking with them.
If they decide to back out, they back out. But if they decide to become allies with the other side, then that would be a whole other story.