Is The Extent of U.S. Support for Israel Absurd?

[angus]

In all fairness, though, the US does pay about 40% of the UN's bills. 

Is it not closer to 22% of the regular budget and 27% of the peacekeeping budget?

Busted.

Okay, I was just pulling a number out of the air.  How did I know anyone was actually going to look it up?  Still, the point stands.  22 to 27 percent of the overall budget ought to buy us permanent bullying rights, even if permanent bullying rights hadn't been established in the original founding documents.

[WillK]

In all fairness, though, the US does pay about 40% of the UN's bills. 

Is it not closer to 22% of the regular budget and 27% of the peacekeeping budget?

22 + 27 = 49. Take that, earth logic!

and 100 + 100 = 200!    [The 22% and 27% are percentages of two different totals, therefore it is illogical to add them.]

[Sibboleth]

In all fairness, though, the US does pay about 40% of the UN's bills. 

Is it not closer to 22% of the regular budget and 27% of the peacekeeping budget?

22 + 27 = 49. Take that, earth logic!

and 100 + 100 = 200!    [The 22% and 27% are percentages of two different totals, therefore it is illogical to add them.]

Indeed. That is why I wrote 'take that, earth logic!'

[WillK]

In all fairness, though, the US does pay about 40% of the UN's bills. 

Is it not closer to 22% of the regular budget and 27% of the peacekeeping budget?

22 + 27 = 49. Take that, earth logic!

and 100 + 100 = 200!    [The 22% and 27% are percentages of two different totals, therefore it is illogical to add them.]

Indeed. That is why I wrote 'take that, earth logic!'

Sorry, I thought you meant something different.

[Јas]

In all fairness, though, the US does pay about 40% of the UN's bills. 

Is it not closer to 22% of the regular budget and 27% of the peacekeeping budget?

Busted.

Okay, I was just pulling a number out of the air.  How did I know anyone was actually going to look it up?

Welcome to the Atlas Forum

For your bedside reading: the assessed national contributions to the UN peacekeeping budget – it contains the data for the percentage contribution for the regular budget as well.

Still, the point stands.  22 to 27 percent of the overall budget ought to buy us permanent bullying rights, even if permanent bullying rights hadn't been established in the original founding documents.

Japan is the second biggest contributor at around 12.5% for both budgets. Germany around 8%.
The EU member states’ contributions amount to 38.9% and 41.3% of the respective budgets.

Not sure at what level of contribution bullying rights should be acquired?

[dialectical fetishist]

No. The extent of left wing support for Terrorstine is though.

[State Comptroller Atkins]

No. The extent of left wing support for Terrorstine is though.

lol

[Јas]

In all fairness, though, the US does pay about 40% of the UN's bills. 

Is it not closer to 22% of the regular budget and 27% of the peacekeeping budget?

Busted.

Okay, I was just pulling a number out of the air.  How did I know anyone was actually going to look it up?

Welcome to the Atlas Forum

For your bedside reading: the assessed national contributions to the UN peacekeeping budget – it contains the data for the percentage contribution for the regular budget as well.

Still, the point stands.  22 to 27 percent of the overall budget ought to buy us permanent bullying rights, even if permanent bullying rights hadn't been established in the original founding documents.

Japan is the second biggest contributor at around 12.5% for both budgets. Germany around 8%.
The EU member states’ contributions amount to 38.9% and 41.3% of the respective budgets.

Not sure at what level of contribution bullying rights should be acquired?

The US's bullying rights are clearly being held up just fine, btw.

Yesterday, the General Assembly held it's 18th annual vote condemning the American embargo of Cuba. The resolution passed 187-2 with 3 abstentions. No prizes for guessing who voted with the US.

That said the Americans lost some ground from last year (187-3-2) - Palau have switched from being opposed to abstaining.

[angus]

The US's bullying rights are clearly being held up just fine, btw.

I'm not knocking the fact that the US is a permanent veto-holder, and I reckon that the "premium" dues are commensurate with such privileges.  I'm just saying that if I weren't a yankee, and more specifically if I were a citizen of one of those nations that we seem to rub the wrong way by playing favorites, then I'd probably be disgusted with the whole arrangement.  But, the arrangement being what it is, I'd have to say that I'd rather be one of the hammers than one of the nails.  (To misquote, out of context, that old 17th-century Jose Milchberg song which was redone by Simon & Garfunkel about 40 years ago.)

[Semaphore]

Israel isn't a baby that needs to be fed and changed throughout the day. I'm sure that Israel can handle itself just fine. Yet we still feel the need to obsessively coddle and shelter it, thus wasting time and resources that could better be spent on fixing our own problems. Of course it's ridiculous.

[Senator Libertas]

No. The extent of left wing support for Terrorstine is though.

lol

Wow, for once I agree with Obamaisdabest...just lol....

[Earth]

No. The extent of left wing support for Terrorstine is though.

Maybe you're missing something in your take on it.

[Mint]

No. The extent of left wing support for Terrorstine is though.

Maybe you're missing something in your take on it.

I'm sure he'll 'figure it out' in 3 months.

[MilesC56]

Joe Lieberman should be stripped of his citizenship and deported to Israel. So should anyone who donates to AIPAC.

I agree 100%.

I'm sure the Likud party would welcome Lieberman.

[Χahar]

Joe Lieberman should be stripped of his citizenship and deported to Israel. So should anyone who donates to AIPAC.

I agree 100%.

I'm sure the Likud party would welcome Lieberman.

He'd be a better fit in the party of the other Lieberman, IMO.

[??????????]

Don't necessarily like it but with all the bullies in the neighborhood having a big brother with his arms crossed behind you isn't necessarily a bad idea.

[milhouse24]

I think its just for oil and the US trying to influence oil supply. 

But I'm surprised that a country that values religious non-discrimination would support any religious theocracy.  I'm very pro-religious freedom, meaning its okay for someone to be pro-christian conservative, pro-catholic, jewish, pro-muslim, etc.  I think its extremely disgusting to discriminate against anyone based on religion or race, and it seems to me that Israel discriminates against religion and ethnicity for non-jews.  I think jews and muslims got along okay until israel declared statehood and a jewish theocracy and jewish-only govt is just not going to be acceptable to a region that has such a large muslim population.  The israeli govt should be non-religious and allow for complete religious freedom of govt officials.  They should not be bound to just one religion.  Maybe the world isn't big enough for all these religions.  I always thought America was a pretty great place for religious freedom and allowing people to strongly practice their faiths but apparently the rest of the world doesn't understand that Theocracies divide and create war. 

For those people who are anti-religion or atheists, then fighting over land based on religious factions is just silly, immature, and discriminatory.  Its time to love thy neighbor and work towards celebrating our different Faiths rather than trying to control the land.

[??????????]

I think its just for oil and the US trying to influence oil supply.

Oil is an export of Israel? Interesting.

Its time to love thy neighbor and work towards celebrating our different Faiths rather than trying to control the land.

Yeah, that's cute and all, if both sides make that their goal. Back here in the real world however.

[milhouse24]

I think its just for oil and the US trying to influence oil supply.

Oil is an export of Israel? Interesting.

Its time to love thy neighbor and work towards celebrating our different Faiths rather than trying to control the land.

Yeah, that's cute and all, if both sides make that their goal. Back here in the real world however.

I don't see why it would be so difficult to have a bipartison govt in Jeruselum with a Jewish and Muslim leader.  I think Palestinians would welcome greater involvement and influence in the Israeli govt.

[milhouse24]

I think its just for oil and the US trying to influence oil supply.

Oil is an export of Israel? Interesting.

Maybe US operatives are trying to influence the mid-east oil countries somehow.  But war instability would actually drive up oil prices, maybe it helps texas oilmen? 

But I'm also surprised that "anti-religion yet pro-Israel Bill Maher" thinks that its okay to have separate yet equal Jewish and Palestinian states.  There was large Jewish immigration into Palestine and many of those Jewish new-comers eventually fought for against the Palestinians.  Instead of trying to take over Palestine and create their own Jewish Govt, they should have sought to create a partnership govt with the Palestinian inhabitants.  I don't think a "Separate but equal" solution is fair or historically accurate. 

[Guderian]

I favor strong American support for Israel as a counterbalance to the impulses of destroying Israel as a Jewish nation-state that are so strong in the Muslim world. However, I think we are at the point where Israelis are getting too spoiled by that support and occasional tough love should be administered more often.

[milhouse24]

I favor strong American support for Israel as a counterbalance to the impulses of destroying Israel as a Jewish nation-state that are so strong in the Muslim world. However, I think we are at the point where Israelis are getting too spoiled by that support and occasional tough love should be administered more often.

Maybe I'm naive, but for some reason I had always thought Israel was Secular just like the rest of the Western countries, especially the USA.  As an American, I completely believe in freedom of religion and all religions, and that the federal govt should not favor or discriminate against any religion.  As an American I also believe in democracy and majority rule, and it seems to me that Israel has tried to rule as a minority religion in an area where there are far more Muslims, historically in the Palestine area.  I know there was a history of British colonialism, Turkish colonialism, etc over Palestine and the Palestinian govt never really took hold before Israel and the Jewish immigrants announced independence.  It just seems un-American to support one religion over another, or support any theocratic government.  I believe that religious wars and fighting is stupid and every govt needs to be secular.

[dead0man]

That's nice and all, but if the nation of Israel was to go away it would most certainly be replaced by a govt that is MUCH more tied to a religion, just a different one.  Wishing all govts be secular is nice and all, but doesn't really change the facts on the ground.  You've heard of the people in charge of Gaza right?  But, one could argue, it won't necessarily be Hamas that takes over...maybe it would be a friendly govt like Egypt.  Ya know, the country that just released a guy that's been in prison for four years (and beaten, but that goes without saying) for "insulting" Islam.  link


I could go around the region finding stories like this, but I just remembered how these discussions always go.  It doesn't matter what information is put up, the anti-Zionists know they are right and know nothing is more important than getting rid of the state of Israel.  So I'll not waste any more of my time.

[The Mikado]

Eh.  If a Palestine had been born 20 years ago it'd have been on secular Arab nationalist grounds (probably similar to Syria or old Iraq).  If a Palestine is born 20 years from now, who knows what it'd subscribe to?  While you're right that at the moment, it'd probably be Hamas-dominated (though not much more than probably...the West Bank knows what a s**thole Gaza is), that won't necessarily always be the case.

[dead0man]

Eh.  If a Palestine had been born 20 years ago it'd have been on secular Arab nationalist grounds (probably similar to Syria or old Iraq).

Two shining beacons on the hill there is no doubt.

No thanks, I'll keep Israel.  The Palestinians are free to make a couple of new countries out of the land they do have.  Yes two.  There is no reason the reasonable people of the West Bank need to have the anchor that is Gaza tied around their necks.