Regarding Richard C. Gross' recent commentary, it's unprecedented for an aid recipient to demand more of a donor rather than simply express gratitude for what is offered ("Israel aid deal delays potential for peace," Sept. 19).
To suggest that a U.S. president has to pay a price in order to repair relations with a country that is totally dependent on maintaining this country's good will is beyond belief.
I challenge you to think of even one thing which Israel has done to benefit the U.S. On the contrary, as Gen. David Petraeus once suggested, the U.S. would no doubt have better relations with the Arab countries and the world were it not for its support of Israel's brutal treatment of the Palestinians — which our aid facilitates to a large extent.
One question raised by Mr. Gross deserves an answer: Why did Washington agree to give Israel $3.8 billion a year? This largesse has continued despite Israel's doing nothing in return. In fact, it is even harming us.
The response to Israel's attack on our warship the USS Liberty in 1967, which killed 34 sailors and wounded 172, would normally be considered an act of war by any country. But somehow Israel is totally absolved of this horrific crime.
So, why does Washington agree to continually pander to Israel? I wish The Sun would undertake an investigative report to answer this question.
Doris Rausch, Columbia