WORLD WAR III
See other WORLD WAR III Articles
Title: Top US General Says American Troops Should be Prepared to Die—for ISRAEL
Source:
Free Thought Project
URL Source: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/to ... al-american-troops-die-israel/
Published: Mar 20, 2018
Author: The Free Thought Project
Post Date: 2018-03-21 09:27:17 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 12490
Comments: 83
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…” This is the oath of enlistment that every American military service member or federal employee takes upon entry into government service (with slight variation for commissioned officers). With the largest joint U.S.-Israeli air defense exercise ever conducted having recently concluded, which involved over 2,500 American service personnel, and in the midst of heightened Israeli involvement in the Syrian war, we find ourselves asking… Are US troops ready to fight and to die for Earlier this month, in the midst of the 9th annual 12-day massive joint exercise named “Juniper Cobra” which was hailed in Israeli media as the largest of its kind, simulating a “battle on three fronts” (namely, Syria-Lebanon-Gaza Strip) US Third Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Richard Clark spelled out just such a scenario wherein US troops could be asked to fight and to die for defense of While major joint military exercises involving significant troop deployments are nothing new for the US and its allies (Juniper Cobra itself has been conducted annually for nearly a decade), Lt. Gen. Clark’s words to Israeli media are truly precedent setting and shocking, especially as he is among the highest ranking military officers in the US armed forces. It is well worth reading the alarming scenario Gen. Clark laid out while speaking to the Jerusalem Post in its entirety: “The United States and Israel enjoy a strong and enduring military-to-military partnership built on a trust that has been developed over decades of cooperation,” said USAF Third Air Force commander Lt.-Gen. Richard Clark, who also serves as the commander for the deploying Joint Task Force – Israel. “The Juniper Cobra exercises continue to strengthen this relationship, providing us with the opportunity to bolster interoperability and develop seamless integration with our Israeli partners.” According to Clark, the US and Israeli troops will work side-by-side under each other’s relevant chain of command. But this is where Clark pushes far across the normative “military-to-military partnership” characteristic of joint drills with other allied nations. He says that US troops should be prepared to die for the Jewish State: “As far as decision-making, it is a partnership,” he continued, stressing nonetheless that “at the end of the day it is about the protection of Israel – and if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to Zvika [Brig.-Gen. Zvika Haimovitch, head of the IDF’s Aerial Defense Division].” Washington and Israel have signed an agreement which would see the US come to assist Israel with missile defense in times of war and, according to [Israeli commander] Haimovitch, “I am sure once the order comes we will find here US troops on the ground to be part of our deployment team to defend the State of Israel.” And those US troops who would be deployed to Israel, are prepared to die for the Jewish state, Clark said. “We are ready to commit to the defense of Israel anytime we get involved in a kinetic fight there is always the risk that there will be casualties. But we accept that – as every conflict we train for and enter, there is always that possibility,” he said. And it appears that both military leaders are in agreement on this point – that they are ready and willing to put US troops in harm’s way in pursuit of Israeli defense policy. Disturbingly, Clark acknowledges willingness for life-and-death battlefield decisions impacting American soldiers to be placed in the hands of the Israeli chain of command in saying: “if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to [Israeli General] Zvika.” While in more stable times in the Middle East, Clark’s words might possibly be dismissed as hyperbole and misplaced enthusiasm for “the mission” – his words come as Israel is already actively involved on two fronts: Gaza and Syria. And according to many analysts and reports, including one recently leaked internal Israeli defense memo, Israel is ramping up for devastating engagement along a third front as Tel Aviv continues to view Lebanese Hezbollah to its north as the prime threat to Israeli security. Should broader war break out between Israel, Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria, will US troops who find themselves working closely with the IDF be forced to obey the commands of Israeli generals, even to the point of death? We can’t find anything in the oath of enlistment or the Constitution [federal statute in 10 U.S.C. 502, and based in Article VI of the Constitution] that requires US citizens or soldiers to defend and fight for a foreign nation. Poster Comment: And those US troops who would be deployed to Israel, are prepared to die for the Jewish state, Clark said. “We are ready to commit to the defense of Israel anytime we get involved in a kinetic fight there is always the risk that there will be casualties. But we accept that – as every conflict we train for and enter, there is always that possibility,” he said.America’s Israel’s defense? …We think not, but there are US generals out there enthusiastically promoting the idea. America Israel – even to the point of being placed under Israeli commanders responsible for battlefield decision making.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 63.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
When you are at war and there are allies in the field, somebody has to be the supreme allied commander, to coordinate operations and decide who will be where. Example: When US forces deployed into the trenches of the Western Front, in France in 1918, the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces was Field Marshall Ferdinand Foch of the French Army. The Supreme Allied commander was ultimately command of all allied troops - French, British, Belgian, American, Canadian, Australian, etc.: everybody fighting on the ground or in the air against the Germans on the Western Front. Similarly, we would assume that in the event of a shooting war in Israel sufficient to require the US Army to actually intervene in the field, that there would be a supreme allied commander. If the fight is in Israel, given Israeli integrated air defense, security forces, etc., relative size of the forces, it is logical that US forces would be integrated into the Israeli forces under Israeli command. That would make logical sense.
We do have permanently assigned military in Israel. We have staff officer exchanges and we do operate that extremely advanced radar system in the desert there with our own personnel (no Israelis). The radar has anecdotally been described as being able to see if someone throws a soccer ball in the air in Tehran. It's considered one of the most advanced radars in the world though you don't read much about it. So it makes sense that, in the event of a major threat or attack on Israel, those military elements present in the country would be used as Israel wants them used. We would likely unlock and grant full access to the radar system (among other things like missile defense units) and place them at the disposal of the IDF general staff. We also do routine intel sharing of space-based recon satellites with Israel. These are limited in peacetime but part of the agreements we have with Israel are that we would unlock their access to our full array of intel assets in the Mideast, including raw feeds from our spy satellites.
Sounds good to me. Israel is a fact. Removing it would require genocide. Worse, removing it would mean giving Islam a huge win. Not acceptable. SHOULD Israel have been put there and supported? No. It's a colony. It should never have been created in the Middle East. It should have been carved out of Germany. Berlin and Brandenburg should not have been a four- way occupied city, it should have been the new capital of a Jewish state. All of the ethnic Germans should have been driven out of Brandenburg, and "East Germany" should have been rebuilt as the Jewish state in Europe. That would have assigned the permanent loss of land to the people who perpetrated the holocaust, and put the Jews right in the heart of where most of the Jews lived before the Nazis: Germany and Poland. But we didn't do that. So now Israel is a fact. And given that it is a fact, and that undoing it would require a genocide; also that the people who so desperately want to undo it are no better than the Nazis were, keeping Israel from being destroyed is a worthy goal - mainly because it pisses off the people who ought to be pissed off. I dislike the extent of Israeli and Jewish influence in American politics, but then, I dislike a lot of things. We're in Israel. We support Israel. It's the right call (not because of the KJV or some other sacrilegious dopey Christian nonsense, but because of real things in the real world). The fact that it makes the people I like least go non-linear means that I want it maintained as a grain of salt in the eye of the people I don't like. It makes them very unhappy, and their unhappiness makes me happy. Therefore, I support Israel. Now, unfortunately, Israel also makes other people I don't like very happy, and that's irritating, but we can't have everything in this world, can we?
You Catholics never read Ezekiel huh?
Yup. And after that the Temple was rebuilt, Israel regathered, went totally corrupt, Jesus came, pronounced the final doom on the Temple, was killed by the Temple authorities - who thereby brought the Deuteronomic doom upon Israel. Israel of the Temple is gone. The old bottle burst. The only covenant that matters is the New Covenant with Christ. Jesus imposed the penalty clause of Deuteronomy on the old Temple and its priesthood, and sent the Roman Army to utterly wipe out the Temple and its priesthood forever, until the end of the world. Christians who fail to read and listen to what Jesus had to say get caught up in intermediate stuff and lose the thread. It's nonsense. The modern state of Israel is a Western European colony, of European Jews, established in the Middle East for two reasons - (1) The Jews wanted out of Europe and wanted THAT land in particular, for reasons that have to do with their myths of themselves - and they were owed something (in most people's minds) because of the Holocaust, and (2) Europeans still didn't like Jews even after the Holocaust, and leapt at the idea of the Jews all self-deporting from Europe to this new Israel. So, Israel is there. It'll be there as long as the West pours in money and arms. After the West stops, Israel will be swamped by the Muslims. The historical parallel is Crusader Outremer, which lasted a bit over a century. Once the West lost interest in propping it up, it was overrun. I don't want to see the overrun, because that will be a genocide, also because it will be a big win for the Muslims, and that's not acceptable. So I'm willing to provide defense assistance to Israel for now. The notion that Christians need to pay tax dollars to uphold the European Jewish colony in Palestine is a weird Protestant fantasy that isn't really supported by the Bible if the Bible is actually read fully and carefully. But Proddies think it is.
Wrong! I guess you don't believe Ezekiel. Looks like you don't believe revelation either.
I guess you don't believe Ezekiel. Looks like you don't believe revelation either. When you get right down to it, you're right. I don't believe that either of those things can or should be taken literally. Because they're not literally true.
Looks like you don't believe revelation either. When you get right down to it, you're right. I don't believe that either of those things can or should be taken literally. Because they're not literally true. Since revelation relates to Genesis. I guess you can throw Genesis in the trash too.
Have to throw out Timothy also. He said all scripture is good and from God. Which you don't believe. How many other books should be removed from the Bible? So far we have Ezekiel, Revelation, Timothy, and Genesis. You didn't say Genesis but implied it imo.
The only language in the Bible I take as authority are the direct words of Christ given as commandments. The rest of it is background information and the opinions of other men. It's interesting, and sometimes wise, but it's not law.
The rest of it is background information and the opinions of other men. It's interesting, and sometimes wise, but it's not law. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 King James Version (KJV) 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I just don't get people who claim to believe in God but think they are smarter then God and pick and choose which parts they want to. It is a pretty silly way to go about it.
God healed my broken neck, raised two dead animals in my hands, drove away a physical demon, and talks to me out loud. He did this before I ever read your idolatrous little book. My religion does not come from your book, and I don't need your book. I recognize the parts of your book that are God speaking, and I also recognize in your little book when it's some man speaking. No aspect of my religion came from your book. I knew God before I read it, and my reading of it didn't change anything regarding my knowledge of God, other than cause me to think about scenarios I have not personally experienced, and to understand how God has interacted with other people. I don't think I'm smarter than God. For me to do what you do would be to walk AWAY from God and think that the book is above God. And that's blasphemy. I criticize the Catholic Church for what it deserves to be criticized for. I mostly stay away from discussing God with Protestants because your minds are closed to him. You worship your little book, and the opinions of men about your little book. You don't talk about GOD with me at all, and you defile God and claim that the God who has kept me alive and sustain me isn't even God. Your ilk calls me a liar and ascribes the miracles I have experienced to Satan, even, because it doesn't fit your narrow-minded human principles revolving around a book written by men. I have never learned a single thing from any Protestant regarding God, other than how to be self-righteous, violent, arrogant and wholly dishonest - and losing the grace of God in the process. I take the book - not your abridged version of it but the whole thing (including the parts that the Catholic Church has left out) - I read it, I see what is good, what is bad, what is true, what isn't true, and what parts came from God. I also read the logic of it, and see and hear God - My God - in the voice of Jesus in his father in the Gospels, Acts and Revelation. I hear Paul speaking from his inspiration in his letters, but I also hear Paul's Judaism struggling to remain relevant in the face of the real God. Paul's love of God is clear, but what he rights is contradictory nonsense in many parts because HE was conflicted, between the Judaism of his upbringing and education - over which he was responsible for the deaths of many Christians - and what God was telling him directly through the spirit. What Protestants do with Paul is scandalous. Now, we've gone through many iterations about religion on these threads over the years. We never get anywhere and we never CAN get anywhere, because you want to "teach me" about God based on the opinions that other men have taught you, but I know God directly, and talk to Him directly when I need to, and he intervenes and saves my life and other things directly with miracles, so I don't need to be taught by you. You are not teaching me anything, you're just yelling at me the opinions of other men. God never told ME that I was a teacher, to go out and talk about him with some new knowledge. He's the same God who spoke out loud through Jesus' mouth. So when you read Paul saying "He who will not work, shall not eat" - and you take that out of context to boot - and then you assert that the words of this man are equal to the words of God Incarnate, speaking about caring for the poor, turning the other cheek, etc. - you're not teaching me anything. You're showing how hopelessly snared you are in this book, that you actually equate the opinions of Paul with regards to running a soup kitchen with the opinions of God. Your little book is a God-maker, to YOUR mind, but not to mine. I'm not a teacher - you can read what God wants in your book, if you read it right. Reading it right, if you want that, is opening to the Gospels, reading what Jesus said there, in Acts and in Revelation, and making THAT your law, because that actually IS the law. The rest is additional material, but quite a bit of it conflicts with Jesus, or changes the focus, and if you want to know God, you would do well to stop confusing the issue with the opinions of Paul and Ezekiel and whoever wrote Genesis, and focus on what Jesus said. But that's not the way Proddies do religion, so you'll never do that. I get why you don't. You are capable of understanding why I don't allow a book written by men to supplant the way I came to God, which was by him coming to me directly, reaching out of the sky and saving my life and talking to me and doing what he has done for me. You are capable of getting me, but you don't want to, because I didn't come to God at all in the way that your pastors say your book says is the only way. Obviously it's not the only way, which means your book is wrong about that. And you cannot hear those words. So we can't really talk at all about religion, can we? So we should stop, because all that happens is that you start beating on me and piling on the insults because you don't like the way that God went about it with me - and all you can do is deny he did it. All I can do is repeat what I know - and because what I know is not acceptable to your religion, we can't get past the impasse, and we just bicker. Which is pointless, unless the POINT is to be mean to each other because our religions differ. To ME, that's pointless. Your mileage may vary.
Are you sure it wasn't Shamash that healed you? In the image, an ancient Assyrian king is wearing a cross on his chest, just like the one seen on the Pope’s robe. Shamash (Akkadian Šamaš “Sun”), was a native Mesopotamian deity and the sun god in the Akkadian, Assyrian and Babylonian pantheons. Shamash was the god of justice in Babylonia and Assyria, corresponding to Sumerian Utu. This cross was identified with a Sun god eight centuries before Christ and long before it was called the Maltese Cross by the Knights of Malta. It’s also called the Iron Cross. Roman Catholic Adolph Hitler renewed use of the Iron Cross in 1939 and superimposed the Nazi swastika in its center. Ask yourself, why does the Pope wear the cross of Shamash the Sun god?
Are you a Jehovah Witness?
No but I love it when they come to my door to talk to me. They find out they have someplace else to be. They never want to stick around and chat to long. Why do you think the Pope wears the sun gods logo?
Shamash, was the god of the sun, justice, morality, and truth. Perhaps it is a Providentional prefiguration. First Christians were depicting Christ as a Victorious Orpheus, Orpheus failed to rescue human soul from Hades, while Christ succeeded. Such frescoes are still preserved in the catacombs.
There are no replies to Comment # 63. End Trace Mode for Comment # 63.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#8. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
Similarly, we would assume that in the event of a shooting war in Israel sufficient to require the US Army to actually intervene in the field, that there would be a supreme allied commander. If the fight is in Israel, given Israeli integrated air defense, security forces, etc., relative size of the forces, it is logical that US forces would be integrated into the Israeli forces under Israeli command. That would make logical sense.
#10. To: Tooconservative (#8)
#11. To: Vicomte13 (#10)
#14. To: A K A Stone (#11)
You Catholics never read Ezekiel huh?
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
#17. To: A K A Stone (#15)
Wrong!
#21. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
I guess you don't believe Ezekiel.
#22. To: Vicomte13 (#21)
#24. To: A K A Stone (#22)
How many other books should be removed from the Bible?
#25. To: Vicomte13 (#24)
The only language in the Bible I take as authority are the direct words of Christ given as commandments.
#28. To: A K A Stone (#25)
I just don't get people who claim to believe in God but think they are smarter then God and pick and choose which parts they want to.
#47. To: Vicomte13 (#28)
(Edited)
God healed my broken neck
#50. To: A K A Stone (#47)
Ask yourself, why does the Pope wear the cross of Shamash the Sun god?
#51. To: A Pole (#50)
Are you a Jehovah Witness?
#63. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13, Tooconservative (#51)
(Edited)
Be Silent, Orpheus; thy lyre throw aside, O Hermes.
The tripod at Delphi hath sunk into oblivion forevermore.
For us David doth now play the Spirit's lyre,
The Hidden things of God's mysteries he revealeth;
A multitude of ancient wonders he narrateth;
Of the Creator of creation, doth he move one to sing.
Saving all those men he initiateth, as he writeth his verses,
Sinners doth he bring to desire repentance.
Among other teachings, to the throng doth he declare the Judge's judgments.
The purging, he doth teach, of soulful sinnings.
(Saint John Chrysostom, 349 – 407 AD)
Replies to Comment # 63.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]