The question inevitably arises of knowing why the United States supports Israel unconditionally and to what extent this discriminatory support would be the cause of potential danger to American interests in the Arab world and even the destabilization of the Arab countries. Terrorist movements invoke the practice of a double standard in citing American policy to try to legitimize their acts of violence. What strategic interest would the continuing occupation of the Golan by Israel represent for the United States? What strategic interest is there to continue to support Israel unconditionally? Would Hamas and Hezbollah represent a threat to the United States or to world security, knowing that there are political armed parties that react only to events related to the occupation of their country and that, consequently, develop political ambitions more nationalist than international? It is certain that the American administration knows the answer to the question of how much unconditional support provided to Israel to maintain the occupation, while at the same time guaranteeing the operational military superiority of the armed Israeli forces, will jeopardize their own future interests. The United States knows, as well, that by beginning to use the right of veto to prevent the passage by the International Criminal Court to Israeli leaders found guilty of humanitarian crimes will only incite the hatred of Arabs. It is this biased policy that fuels the hatred of the Arab world and that defines the nature of the reactions of the oppressed. Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah nor any Arab country constitutes a threat to American interests in the region. But without the support of Washington, Israel would undoubtedly not have been uncompromising on the issue of the creation of a Palestinian state.