Israel and America......our are interests mirror images?

As a supporter of Israel, I have always thought they are our best ally in the Middle East. However, America's self interest is different than the state of Israel. If you are a loyal American, we must do what is best for American self interest. If we share 90% of the same interests, should we remain silent when 10% of the issues hurt America? Do we do this out of loyalty to an ally? However, what if that same ally tries to leverage that historic relationship to possibly bring harm to Americans where the issues fall squarely in that 10% range where our interests are not the same?

I suggest that the current leadership of Israel better proceed very carefully. The dog will not be wagged by the tail. We will not be blackmailed in an election year to put our kids in harms way when we are talking about those interest which are not mirror image issues. Americans do not take being pushed around by our enemies, or our friends.

I have no use for an American who commits treason, but on the other hand I do not want to change the common sense ratios. I think they are a good ally. I realize you do not. I think we share a relationship which is 90/10, and you perhaps feel it is 50/50 or worse.

My point of this post is that instead of arguing whether bombs were planted in 911, I have argued that made no strategic sense if terror was the goal. Some things must be taken at face value. However, going into the election cycle where suddenly some obscure and offensive film gets mainstreamed overnight into middle east media, and a very precise military strike happens in Libya......there are only a few options in my mind.

1. Khaddafi supporter extracted their pound of flesh for an American hero who brought their corrupt world to an end(we saw that much of the Iraq violence was the sunni folks who were losing power, yet we mistakenly thought it was Al Queda.

2. It was a spontaneous non planned extension of the Arab spring.

3. It was a planned event which could provide strategic advantage to someone.
a. Al Queda
b. Israel
c. Special interests who profit from war
d. Another nation state not yet defined.

I think it was option three. I have serious concerns that I am going to sound like T on this one, but I am concerned that it could be option 3b or 3c.

I will await for the investigation, but like I have argued with T, I think the strategy must be understood, and explosives in the buildings make no sense, rather who had influence of Bin Laden? Here, where are the connections to the video, and who controlled the precise and certain attack on our ambassador? No tinfoil. just pure geopolitical reality.