Reagan cut military aid and froze weapons sales to Israel in 1981

[WilliamPitt]

AMY GOODMAN: What kind of leverage does the U.S. money, the U.S. aid for Israel provide?

FRIDA BERRIGAN: Well, when you’re talking about 20% of the Israeli military budget, you’re talking about a huge fulcrum of leverage, right? The United States could today say, you know, “This incursion into Lebanon, the killing of civilians, the bombing in Gaza, all of this is not internal security, all of this is not self-defense, and we’re cutting it off.” And they could cut it off tomorrow. And that would essentially not only send an incredibly strong message to the Israeli military, but it would remove the tools of the occupation, the tools of the bloodshed and the suffering that’s happening in Lebanon and in Gaza.

It was interesting to sort of place the very weak statements that have come from the administration -- “Oh, there should be” -- you know, they have said things, like “They should practice restraint,” and stuff like that. Meanwhile, just on the 14th, the United States decided to sell $120 million worth of jet fuel to the Israeli military. The little notice that announced the sale from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency said, “This fuel will be used to promote peace and security in the region.” And then, meanwhile, you have jets strafing villages, bombing civilians, taking out bridges, destroying water treatment plants. So the United States could decide and would have a very strong case and a historic precedent for deciding to cut military aid.

AMY GOODMAN: What’s the precedent?

FRIDA BERRIGAN: In 1981, the last time there was a full-on invasion by the Israeli government into Lebanon, the Reagan administration cut military aid and froze weapons sales to Israel, while it did an investigation of whether or not the weapons were being used for self-defensive and internal security purposes. So for ten weeks in 1981, nothing went into Israel. Now, at the end of that ten weeks, they said, “Oh, well, you could argue ’til eternity about what constitutes defensive use of weapons.” But under the Reagan administration, while Alexander Hague was the Secretary of State, we did cut off weapons sales and military aid. And we certainly haven't done that since. And when we look at how the conflict and the war continues to unfold with so many civilians being killed and this bare use of force and power by the Israeli military, it seems like it’s time to explore that option again.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/21/1432202

[DRoseDARs]

1. But The Reagan is holy, He would never do such a thing...

...the history books and public records are lying. Damned liberal "truths" and "facts."

[Cruzan]

4. As I recall, he was believing the standard self-defense, internal

security line until he started watching the images on TV and saw for himself all the seemingly targeted civilian carnage in Lebanon. And in a pure, gut, emotional response he just got on the phone and cut off the weapon resupplying before his 'handlers' could get a chance to stop him.

[Gman]

2. That was before the rise of the end-timers

into influence and power in DC. Can't happen like that today.

[Arkham House]

3. An example of "Only Nixon Could go to China"...

Reagan was a supposed tough guy and hawk, so he could afford to do something like that...if Jimmy Carter had tried, he'd have been cricified--not least by Ronald Reagan...

[Oilwellian]

5. Very Interesting

Of course that was back in the day when there was still a smidge of sanity in our foreign policies. Today, war is a racket and our policies are based on greed and imperialistic power.

[Captain Hilts]

6. George II threatened the same. George 3rd is a toadie. nt

[PATRICK]

7. That adds another reason

why the desperate "use it and lose it" so it can be replaced under Bush thinking. This is the window of aggressive opportunity and even with the ambitious, unstoppable Bush agenda of toppling all of Israel's enemies(unfortunately leaving unpredictable chaos in its wake). They seem blindly mesmerized in this vertigo of attack and not seeing the masses of neighbors for the bothersome extremists they can no longer defeat through their superior military force.

This is raised as a solution which no longer exists. Rather, the post reveals what the precise problem is and why they have repeated the Lebanon strategy in the first place. because this time, whatever happens, they have a blank check and a green light. Add that to a weak government and Sharon's coma and one wonders if there is even an auto pilot on for Israeli policy.

It used to be the Israeli intelligence and methods were the best in the ME. Now you can see how well it profits the US in Iraq and what a sorry tag team we now make.

[mmonk]

8. That really shows how far America has moved away from

seeking solutions and from being a factor for a world that seeks peace. AIPAC influence in my estimation has reached a new pinnacle.