Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : World Affairs Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: goldsnow who wrote (1051)	7/25/2002 8:28:17 PM
From: Thomas M.	Respond to of 3959

We are talking about when the U.S. policy shifted from neutral to pro-Israeli. That shift is clearly demarcated by the shift from supporting UN 242 to rejecting UN 242. In other words, we went from punishing Israel for starting the 1967 War to rewarding Israel for starting the 1967 War. That happened in 1971, when Kissinger won the power struggle in the State Department over Rogers. Since Nasser was dead then, he is not relevant to this discussion. If you want to suggest that we increased support for Israel because of Soviet influence in Egypt, we can discuss that. That hypothesis is clearly false. Immediately upon entering office, Sadat told the U.S. he wanted peace with Israel and he wanted to become a U.S. client-state. Israel and Kissinger rejected him. Then, Sadat expelled the Soviets from Egypt, to demonstrate that he was serious about wanting to become a U.S. client state. Still, nothing from Israel/Kissinger. Finally, he said he would have to use his military to drive Israeli troops from the Sinai. Israel/Kissinger again ignored him. In 1973, he did this. That immediately got the wheels turning, and then in 1977 Israel signed the same peace treaty that Egypt had offered in 1971, and the U.S. made Egypt a client-state that it remains today. Tom