It is in America's best interest,to support Israel

I would also like to point out that debates should be voted upon for the sake of debate; do not vote all for one side or the other simply because that is the side you personally take. Only take into account your personal opinion when required by the voting system. 1. While Israel may be one to the only democratic nations in the Middle Easy, this does not justify our involvement in its protection and alliance. In fact, because it is the only so unique in that area of the world and nations like Iran have stated that they will blow it off the face of the planet, given the chance, it is in our best interests to withdraw from Israel. Not only does our involvement sap our resources which could be better put toward our own domestic interests, but it inevitably sets us up to be involved in the next global conflict. As soon as a hostile nation attacks Israel, the bombs will fly. If we are still involved in the affairs of this nation, we put ourselves smack in the middle of this conflict, which will result in no good whatsoever. While it may seem like the American dream to spread democracy to the nations that do not currently have it, supporting a nation as fragile as Israel is a mistake. We must first focus on our own affairs and bring together a more concentrated military force before we continue to associate ourselves with a ticking bomb. 2. Obviously, terrorism is a major concern to the United States, but the war against it should be undertaken by supporting nations that only give our country more weakness. The United States' alliance with Israel links it to a blood feud that has been going on for thousands of years. Israel may be a relatively sound ally, but they do not provide us with enough of an advantage to justify the risks that come with them. If the United States were to withdraw direct support of Israel, we would be rid of a potential hole in our defenses and could instead adopt a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" policy where we work toward a common goal, but do not end up linked to the violence and bombings that hover over Israel. In this way, we could more fully concentrate our military force while also staying in a friendly relationship with Israel (rather than an official alliance, which brings any attack against it down on our heads), given that they will also work toward counter-terrorism. America's fight against terrorism is better done without official alliances with countries that, in the end, are more hindrance than help. 3. In 2006-07, Israel was rated 18th in information technology. ( . http://knowledge.insead.edu... ) However, if we take a look at the list of other nations in the top twenty, we'll notice that many of them, if not all of them, are strong allies of the United States. Could the United States do without Israel's tech? Of course. You'll notice that the 6 nations ahead of the United States itself are unlikely to ever be a major target for military action thus making strong bets for sources of technology. As for the argument that "Israel had many breakthroughs in. .. " Whatever breakthroughs they have had are in the past now. We have the technology. Withdrawal of our military and financial support for Israel will not make these advancements suddenly disappear from our arsenal. We will still have access to them. Anything Israel comes up with after our withdrawn support will likely not be worth the resources and risks we take in order to protect them and remain allies. Israel fixes weapons, huh? Do we really believe that the United States military ships their weapons to Israel every time something goes wrong and says, "Here, fix it! " Seriously. We are more competent than that. Without Israel, we'll simply have to repair things ourselves, anyway. As with advances in technology, we won't suddenly have no idea how to repair our weapons. Our military will still have the ability to fix weapons. Our military is due for more credit than we give it. . .. Water will not become as scarce as oil. Yes, fresh water is nice to have around. But do we absolutely need it? No. In the very, very unlikely scenario that fresh water does become that scarce, there are oceans. Salt water is not something we just have to deal with. It can be purified for drinking. The only reason this is not employed currently is because of inconvenience in cost and mass application. But, given a dire need, I'm confident that financial greed would be put aside and plans would be devised to implement a system that would provide water to the population. Again, the medicine we currently have that Israel has devised will not suddenly disappear after withdrawal of support. We will still have medicines and other assorted technology to support the general population and military. Israel is not so integrated into our affairs that we cannot live without them. If we continue to support Israel monetarily and militarily: 1. We open ourselves up to an unneeded hindrance in operations and potentially involve ourselves in mass warfare that could easily be avoided. If we WITHDRAW support of Israel: 1. We eliminate potential risks and could consolidate resources, finances, and military in order to more effectively wage war on terrorism. 2. We CAN still have a FRIENDLY relationship with them. 3. The technology they have developed will not cease to exist. 4. If it does "cease to exist" it may be an unfortunate loss of a good, friendly country, but our nation will not be involved in following affairs. Actions should be taken for the benefit of OUR nation first and foremost. We do not have the economy or beneficial situation it would take to effectively support and protect both ourselves and Israel. Again, let me remind you to judge the debate, not choose a side and vote according to that which you most agree with. I am looking forward to my opponent's rebuttal.