Relative was Portuguese colonist whose family was encouraged to locate there by Portuguese govt. Increasing instability in part brought on by changing US gov't policy led to violent outcome in Angola (it is now an economic disaster but I don't have the time or energy to debate whether a more representative government along with staggering poverty was worth it). Kennedy supported various rebel factions against the Portuguese gov't. Relative had to flee leaving behind everything they had. However, I think you might be completely missing my point. Those who advocate the US as international policeman have to also deal with inconsistency. Internationally, who the good and bad guys are sometimes is really a matter of opinion. With opinions, identification of who the good and bad guys are may differ every four to eight years as presidents with different views come into power. This may lead to inconsistent and provocative international strategies with real long term consequences.

QuoteWe spend am estimated $3 billion a year defending S Korea, and the ingrates burn US flags in the street.Being thankful is not a political category. (Richelieu).Anyway US could do something on N-Korea rather than searching for talibans in Iraq.

Interestingly, the US is fighting this war according to policies that Israel has been following for a long time, in particular pre-emption and taking control of potential adversaries' territory. What we seem to have missed, however, in how Israel keeps it going, is finding a benevolent outside nation to supplement our GDP by 5% with its aid. At an $11 trillion GDP, that's about $550 billion a year we'd need to be subsidized as much as we subsidize Israel, relative to GDP. That would cover our entire defense budget, and leave in addition nearly $200 billion for other things -- maybe we could have health care provided by the government, as Israel does. Naturally, if we follow Israel's example, our defense spending will have to rise a whole lot, so we shouldn't count on being able to spend all of that extra $200 billion on non-defense items.Well, I'm getting ahead of myself. Obviously, we need to find someone to give us the $550 billion a year to begin with. If we take all of Iraq's GDP as tribute, that will cover maybe 15% of that, once the effect of ending the sanctions is considered. Of course, that won't leave the Iraqis much for food and clothing or things like that, but maybe we can get the EU to provide them with humanitarian aid -- how are our relations with the EU these days, anyway?

Let's not make things too difficult, ppauper -- I agree that it would be great if the US could find benefactors to supplement our GDP by 20%, but let's set 5% as our goal for right now. I think that if Israel can get by on this amount of aid (if it really is getting by: they've asked us to pony up a whole bunch more this year), we ought to do so as well while we are following policies parallel to theirs. If it turns out not to be enough, we can try to get up to 10%.Again, I'm getting ahead of myself. We still need to find that first $550 billion. Maybe Jerry Lewis could help -- even the French like him!

I dislike that we (the US) enable Israel to commit war crimes, and I dislike that we provide economic aid to Israel when its standard of living is among the highest in the world. And I like to remind people of these things because I think that, when confronted with the facts, most people will dislike these things as well.But in this instance, Israel is important because it seems that the US is moving toward adopting Israel's policies regarding how to deal with the rest of the world.

Originally posted by: Marsden"But in this instance, Israel is important because it seems that the US is moving toward adopting Israel's policies regarding how to deal with the rest of the world."***********************************************So per the title of this discussion, it is not so much that Israel is the 51st state so much as the US is a province of Israel? Interesting.