Congress halts aid to Lebanese army, unprovoked attack on Israeli soldier in Israel

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=184210

Nita Lowey, chair of key committee, blocks military assistance to LAF.


WASHINGTON – A senior US Congresswoman is blocking funding to the Lebanese military following its attack on Israeli soldiers last week.

"This incident was tragic and entirely avoidable. US assistance is intended to enhance our safety and that of our allies,” Rep. Nita Lowey (D-New York) said Monday.

Lowey chairs the House appropriations subcommittee that handles foreign aid and needs to authorize such funds. The $100 million in Lebanese military assistance approved for 2010 has yet to be disbursed, giving Lowey a window to put a hold on the funding for the immediate future.

Lowey is looking to find out more about the nature of what she termed an “outrageous incident” as well as watching how Lebanon responds in the wake of the violence.

“These holds are typically dependent on the actions and rhetoric coming out of the relevant nations,” a Democratic aide noted.

Last Tuesday, Lebanese Armed Forces soldiers shot at Israeli officers who were clearing brush along the northern border, killing one and seriously wounding another. The IDF returned fire, killing two soldiers and a journalist.

A State Department official said that the US is still trying to ascertain the facts regarding the incident, including whether there’s any truth behind reports that the LAF troops used American-issued guns.

“We consistently review all of our security assistance programs to all receiving countries,” the official said. “Ultimately, we continue to believe that our support to the LAF and ISF [Internal Security Forces] will contribute toward improving regional security.”

He added that the funding “is part of an international effort to help strengthen the institutions of the Lebanese state. We have provided support to Lebanon to strengthen the ability of the Lebanese government to exercise its own sovereignty.”

LAF funding approved for 2009 and already in the pipeline is still being distributed by the US as scheduled as of now.

Another $100 million had already been preliminarily approved by Lowey’s subcommittee for 2011 before the incident occurred. That money could also be affected when that spending bill is considered by the rest of the committee and House when Congress reconvenes from its summer recess in September.

Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, House minority whip, called Monday for 2011 funding to be blocked until the incident had been investigated and it was clear that the Lebanese military wasn’t collaborating with Hizbullah.

“The LAF’s unprovoked attack on the Israeli defense forces in undisputed Israeli territory demands a sweeping reassessment of how we distribute our foreign aid," Cantor declared in a statement issued Monday.

“The purpose of the assistance was to build up a Lebanese fighting force that would serve as a check on the growing power of the radical Islamist Hezbollah movement,” he noted, referring to hundreds of millions of dollars the US has already spent training and equipping the LAF in recent years.

"For the past few years, the US and the international community looked the other way as the lines between Hezbollah and the Lebanese military and government became blurred,” he charged. “But the days of ignoring the LAF’s provocations against Israel and protection of Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon are over.”


Good. Lebanon better shape up or it will lose it's only ally that can protect it from Israel in the event of a war.

An unprovoked attack on an Israeli soldier in Israeli Land is an act of war.

and with the rumors that it may have been American guns is even more shocking
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
How dare we call this "unprovoked"!!!

The Israeli soldiers were Jewish and that is provocation enough. They are on lands that do not belong to them.

Let us all support the moderate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other Arabs against the evil radical right Israeli state.


(that is sarcasm for the AT P&N crowd who takes things too seriously)
 
Last edited:

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
How dare we call this "unprovoked"!!!

The Israeli soldiers were Jewish and that is provocation enough. They are on lands that do not belong to them.

Let us all support the moderate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other Arabs against the evil radical right Israeli state.


(that is sarcasm for the AT P&N crowd who takes things too seriously)


oh my god. thanks for the laugh! HAHA :D:D:D
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
Gee...what a surprise that she sided with Israel...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nita_Lowey'

Nita Melnikoff Lowey

Religion Jewish


So? She wasnt the only one to call for a halt. She just happened to be a chairman on the foreign affairs committee

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jBvCxlK6YMrSDIgr5B0jeAWlfljgD9HG8N280
This AP article explains that others went forward with the halt. names include:

Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif
Reps. Ron Klein, D-Fla.
Eric Cantor, R-Va.


It is their job as being part of the committee to assess these issues.

The aid was halted, not stopped. They asked for it to be halted while they investigate.
 
Last edited:

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
If one person can halt US aid to an entire country over one fairly minor incident the same can happen to Israel who has not exactly acting as a paragon of virtue recently or ever.

And look how much more money the taxpayers saves if we cut Israel off without a dime.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
If one person can halt US aid to an entire country over one fairly minor incident the same can happen to Israel who has not exactly acting as a paragon of virtue recently or ever.

And look how much more money the taxpayers saves if we cut Israel off without a dime.

And how many more lives it will cost as a result.

The enemies of Israel will become more agressive and Israel will realtiate without hestiation - she now has nothing to loose (similar to her first 30 years)
 

bigpimpatl

Senior member
Jul 11, 2005
474
0
0
^ seriously, we can't afford to prop up our solutions to the region. Cut aid from Egypt and Israel and we'll save at least $10 billion a year.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
what part of the article is incorrect?

Quoting jpost is like quoting the national enquirer as a legitimate source of information. It doesn't mean the information is wrong, even the "hey, there's bat-boy, the abducting aliens must have returned him!" national enquirer gets one right every now and again. jpost as a source of legitimate news is just laughable. WND has nuttin' on jpost.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
$100 M potentially withheld? That's huge to a sh*thole country like Lebanon for their army.

Yep, I see that in 2009 it was 875 Million.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I would not be surprised if we see the day when congress does indeed stop foreign aid to Israel. Over a next five year time span, its more probable than not.

And not only Congress has the power, so does the President of the USA. And to keep in good standing, the UN may make the decision mandatory.
 

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
Seems like a good move by the USA to save lives in the region.

With the Israeli demand (haven't seen a news source that 100% confirms this) that the Lebanese officer in charge of this attack be court martialed and/or ejected from the military or the Lebanon army will be considered a hostile force so if another act of unprovoked aggression occurs Israel will target Lebanese military positions in the south at will, this will help pressure Lebanon to quash this type of thinking in their military.

If labeled as a rouge soldiers acting without orders and hanging said rouge soldiers out to dry, Lebanon will discourage any future cases like what has happened. If anther such attack is ordered by the military then the soldiers will lose a great deal of moral knowing they will be hung out to dry and possibly not do it.

If Lebanon goes down the path of trying to start another conflict with Israel it will be bad for both sides (but far, far worse for Lebanon) with the possibility of the conflict escalating to include other countries like Syria.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
I would not be surprised if we see the day when congress does indeed stop foreign aid to Israel. Over a next five year time span, its more probable than not.

And not only Congress has the power, so does the President of the USA. And to keep in good standing, the UN may make the decision mandatory.
if there's one thing that'll get you far in modern American politics, it's siding with Muslims.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
if there's one thing that'll get you far in modern American politics, it's siding with Muslims.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But loki, I am not running for office, nor did I see any evidence that you are basing the action on a given entire country being right or wrong based on the actions of a few of its soldiers.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Now ZzZguy comes up with, "With the Israeli demand (haven't seen a news source that 100&#37; confirms this) that the Lebanese officer in charge of this attack be court martialed and/or ejected from the military or the Lebanon army will be considered a hostile force so if another act of unprovoked aggression occurs Israel will target Lebanese military positions in the south at will, this will help pressure Lebanon to quash this type of thinking in their military."

Maybe we should Court martial the Israeli officer in charge too. After all, UN peacekeepers were aware that both sides claimed the same given piece of land.
And while the UN peacekeepers were trying to find out where the disputed border was and advance of the UN peacekeepers findings, Israel decided to act anyway.
Does it matter if Israel was later shown to be right, the rational Make sure everyone is on the same page before acting. If this was a court order and the UN peacekeepers were the court, any side that acted before the court ruled would automatically be in the wrong. And in this case it would be Israel, they started cutting the disputed tree and then the Lebanese side, thinking it was their tree, retaliated.

Four lives wasted for a stupid tree, just because the Israeli officer could not wait for the UN peacekeepers to decide.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
But loki, I am not running for office, nor did I see any evidence that you are basing the action on a given entire country being right or wrong based on the actions of a few of its soldiers.
you're surmising that the President or a congressman blocking funding towards Israel is imminent.

I counter with the fact that, for purely political reasons, no US politician will ever side with a Muslim nation or organization over Israel at any point in the near future (assuming nothing happens like, israel launching nuclear bombs or something)
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
64,702
13,050
146
Originally Posted by Lemon law
I would not be surprised if we see the day when congress does indeed stop foreign aid to Israel. Over a next five year time span, its more probable than not.

And not only Congress has the power, so does the President of the USA. And to keep in good standing, the UN may make the decision mandatory.
if there's one thing that'll get you far in modern American politics, it's siding with Muslims.

Cutting off all foreign aid to Israel does not equal siding with Muslims.

This country has enough financial problems of its own...we do NOT need to be sending Billions of $$$ to other countries. Most conservatives seem to be anti-welfare...and think that helping the poor should be left to church groups and private citizens...how about applying that same concept to Israel? Take away the US tax dollars. Let churches and private citizens support them if they choose...BUT, without any benefit of a taxable deduction for such..."gifts."
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
you're surmising that the President or a congressman blocking funding towards Israel is imminent.

I counter with the fact that, for purely political reasons, no US politician will ever side with a Muslim nation or organization over Israel at any point in the near future (assuming nothing happens like, israel launching nuclear bombs or something)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I am basing my assertion that Israel will do enough future things so that even US existent pro Israel public opinion significantly reduces. As it is, Israel has done much to lose US public support in the last decade, it not nearly as strong as it was a decade before. Of course, a total Israeli fan clubber can see no sins in Israel and hence becomes a possible next Earl Landgrebe, as Nixons last congressional supporter
after the last tapes came out. And because an Israeli fan clubber can see no sins in Israel, they will be blind to the fact that most others see what they cannot.

But Loki also misses another point, to strip aid to Israel based on bad Israeli behavior has nothing to do with Muslims, Congress can still feel free to dis like Muslims and Israeli too.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,616
6,447
126
I have two reactions to this. One is that it sucks what was done and the other that you can't really use the word unprovoked when talking about stuff in the Middle East.

The chain of revenge for grievances goes back into the mists.