"The U.S. supports Egypt with weapons and soldiers, so our government is paralyzed and unable to do anything" -- from this story
The idea that it is money that is buying Egypt's "peace" is false. The reasons for Egypt's "peacefulness" are clear from history. In May 1948 the Arabs attacked the nascent state of Israel: 600,000 Jews with no arms. The rifles they had were given them by the British during the war because the British knew that the Jews of Palestine would help fight the Germans (and they did -- volunteering for the most dangerous, suicidal missions in Syria, Iraq, and Egypt). But those rifles were taken back by the British after the war. The Arabs certainly thought they would win. They learned a lesson.
That lesson, which was to avoid all-out assault, was then over time unlearned. In May 1967 Nasser showed that he believed that this time the assault would be successful. The Arab fiasco that followed kept the peace, for a while -- until 1973. The defeat of 1967 stopped, for a long period, not only Egypt but the rest of the Arab countries from attacking Israel. It made them realize that they would have to be more patient, try to wear Israel down with an economic, diplomatic, and every other kind of siege, but not with an all-out military assault. A lesson was learned – but that lesson was not "we must never attack Israel again." Rather, it was "we must not attack Israel until we have sufficiently weakened it so as to have a chance of success." By 1973, Sadat and the Syrians thought they had a reasonable chance of success if they launched a surprise attack on Yom Kippur. And they were right. They almost pulled it off.
And in that case, Israel pulled things out only after a few days and heavy losses, but that it did pull things out, that it could, without the Nixon-Kissinger saving of Egypt's Third Army from complete destruction by Sharon, taught Sadat a lesson. The lesson was to use wiles and smiles to win what could not be won by war, and that is exactly what he did in offering that "peace" that consisted of Israel handing over tangible assets, the Sinai, and Egypt promising merely to refrain from hostile acts and to encourage friendly relations -- which, of course, the Egyptian government had no intention of doing, and never did.
Egypt has done nothing to deserve its $60 billion. It has consistently shown obvious malevolence toward Israel, not merely in its television programming (a multi-part series based on "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is not exactly fulfilling the solemn commitments under the Camp David Accords), but in the thousands of rifles and explosives and other materiel smuggled for years, with the Egyptians being perfectly aware of it, through tunnels dug from Egyptian-controlled Sinai right into Gaza, and in the refusal to allow Egyptians to travel to Israel, Mubarak's refusal to meet with his Israeli counterpart in Israel, and in so many other ways. All this shows that Egypt has failed to live up to its quite modest promises under those Accords.
Egypt in 2004 was the third largest spender on foreign arms, after China and India. Why did Egypt buy $7.5 billion in arms? Why does Egypt continue, if its people are so impoverished, to spend billions on arms?
Why are we supporting a corrupt and vicious regime, one that has locked up Ayman Nour, that closes blogs and arrests the bloggers, that permits assaults on Copts, that protects the Sudan from any effective intervention in Darfur? What has that $60 billion bought us? Has it bought Egypt's honoring the Camp David duties? Has it changed Egypt's attitude toward Israel, official and unofficial, in the press and in the population? Suppose back in 1979 the Egyptians really had decided to end hostile propaganda and to try to encourage friendly relations toward Israel, as it was supposed to, as it was required to, and had done that for the past 27 years?
And what about the fact that Egyptians are among the most anti-American people in the entire Middle East-- far more so than the Iranians, who get nothing from us? In fact, only in Jordan, the other big recipient of American aid, is the hatred of Americans more widespread.
A lesson here, perhaps? Since Arab states are all despotisms (save for Iraq, but in Iraq the returns are not yet in, the government not yet settled), anyone who gives aid to that government will be contributing to that despotism. And besides, Muslims do not react as non-Muslims do to American aid. They are not grateful for it. They expect it. They demand it. They are outraged if the Infidels even so much as hint at cutting it. And it is for that reason alone, that all aid to malevolent Egypt should not be cut, but eliminated entirely.
It is important for Infidels and Muslims alike that all examples of the Jizyah be ended. Important to establish a healthy relationship, one that does not inadvertently mimic, even re-establish, the 1350-year-old Jizyah paid by dhimmis, non-Muslims subjugated to Muslim rule. It is important for Muslims to earn their own living, and not, in Dar al-Harb or Dar al-Islam, to be allowed to soak the Infidels. Not by exploiting, as in the countries of Western Europe, all conceivable benefits offered by the state, and then some. Not in the Muslim countries themselves, by managing either to impose a disguised Jizyah on non-Muslims, as happens in Malaysia, or by extracting from non-Muslim taxpayers in Infidel lands foreign aid which is merely a different kind of disguised Jizyah.
The very idea that it is money that is buying Egypt's "peace" is not only false, but raises a different question. If the only way that we can buy "peace" from Egypt, and prevent it from attacking Israel by bribing it, what does that tell us about Egypt? Anything? Nothing? What does that say about Egypt as a "peaceful" country, as a country that honors its treaty commitments?
Is there any mechanism within the US government (e.g. the State Dept., USAID or the General Accounting Office ), which analyzes the success or failure of foreign aid programs? I've never heard of one. Such a mechanism should be instituted, and first to be analyzed should be the jizya (tribute) we hand over to Egypt. There's an idea for Mr. Tancredo.
We give aid to Eygpt for the same reason we give it to just about everybody else who lives in a tin pot country - the inevitable "white man's burden" syndrome. We also give it because we think that it helps to keep the places pacified and the governments stable as we know that world turmoil can be bad for the stock markets. America and the rest of the west sees it as an investment in itself like giving money to the unemployed to keep them off the streets.
That's the cynical but candid take on it. Is that a good reason for giving these horrible countries our hard earned money? No. They probably would be better off without our charity, but we feel, and by we, I mean the liberal elite that we elect, that these places are poor only through bad geopolitical luck and we, vice versa. So it is guilt money also.
Guilt money. Witness Bonehead from U2 who, because he has so much wealth himself, suffers from a huge guilt complex that motivates him to demand the world give billions to the worst countries on the planet. Never mind that his own personal wealth, in the hundreds of millions, could feed all of east Africa for several years, yet he holds on to his personal wealth. It's YOUR personal wealth he wants to dole out.
Until every American (and European) lives in a decent house, with cradle-to-grave education and health benefits, any money pissed into the sands of Egypt, or any other Muslim land, is like throwing sirloin to crocodiles while you feed your kids canned Spam.
Trillions for defense but not a cent for tribute!
And this crypto-jizyah is nothing but "tribute".
Enough! 1.2 billion times.
somethingaboutislam
I still haven't found what I'm looking for
If you are looking for my place, you won't find it. It's a new subdivision and the streets have no names.
something about/ Infidel Pride-
Of course you do have to oppose Imperialistic Islam in the name of love.
One more. In the name of love.
I can't live with or without bonehead.
Hugh,
Please don't forget how Egypt, honouring its "peace accord" turned a blind eye to the arms smuggling tunnels on its 7 mile Gaza border all these years, which also saw the movement of Hezbollah "businessmen in suits" for training and proving weapons systems (such as the IED now used with such bloody success in Iraq and the building and use of rockets) against Israeli armour and polpulace.
One must also note how the Egyptians blinded by American largesse permitted the stockpiling of arms, explosives and drugs in Rafiah for the week of non-stop activity when Hamas broke through the border wall and claimed its prize just after Israel's disengagement from Gaza last year.
Something not mentioned is that many of the RPG rounds and grenades are made in Egypt.
(I believe that they also producing Abrams tanks by the hundreds.)
One must also not forget the border mess Rice and Wolfensohn "brokered" that permitted a ten fold increase in the flow of arms while hamstringing Israeli security.
Hamas has been upping the ante for some time and some weeks ago, before the Gaza Beach spectacle, two young girls were almost kidnapped but thanks to one fighting back the other managed to escape and alert soldiers nearby.
Just to end off: Is there a word equivalent to dhimmitude but in this instance referring to kowtowing to Palestinian sensitivity?
I ask this because the State Department website offering rewards:
"for information that prevents, frustrates or favorably resolves acts of international terrorism against U.S. persons or property worldwide."
does use the word Palestinian in its description of the terrorist groups and individuals.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50880
OOPS!
Forgot the word NOT between does and use in the last sentence above.
A commenter above asked, "Is there any mechanism within the US government (e.g. the State Dept., USAID or the General Accounting Office ), which analyzes the success or failure of foreign aid programs?"
Such analysis should be done by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in each agency. Most large and medium size US government agencies have OIGs (http://www.ignet.gov/).
I haven't read of DoS OIG doing any such analysis, especially based on criteria which JW staff and readers understand to be relevant. But then I also have not read of DoS OIG investigating the statements in the WaPo in 2002 (I believe) of Prince Bandar, former Saudi Ambassador to the US, that the Saudis make it known to those in the US civil service who support the Saudi line that their loyalty will be rewarded when they retire from the government.
Clark Ervin, former head of the OIG for Department of Homeland Security recently wrote a book on his frustrating attempts to correct failure, waste and mismanagement at that agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clark_Ervin).
... and here is what Egypt has given in return:
- Arafat.
- Al-Zawahiri.
- Atta.
- Al-Masri.
Are you listening/reading, Condi?
have_mercy, it's interesting that while you are talking about the reality of Egypt, most of the international media --especially bbc-- seem to go along with the Arab propaganda line that they, the Arab Muslims and other Muslims, are the ones really in danger. Have you noticed the paranoid tone in so much of the rhetoric that comes out of Egypt, Iran, Syria, poor, starving Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood, which you know as the Ikhwan [which also comprises Hamas]? Most of the Arab Muslims who get murdered nowadays are murdered by fellow Arab Muslims [in Iraq, Algeria, etc.].
This may be something for Hugh to get his teeth into:
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/world/*http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060703/ap_on_re_af/somalia