Independence?

Birthdays and new year days are usually good times to consider one's achievements. Well, it's not my birthday, but it is Israel's 62nd. So, happy birthday Israel, let's see how you're doing.
Lately I complained about the way the Obama Administration meddles with Israeli policy, and puts its democratically elected government at awkward positions, sometimes demanding things that contradict the very ticket they had used to get elected. At this point I would like to tackle the other side and answer the following questions: why does the administration think it's a legitimate move, and how can Israel escape this dire situation.
Israel has relied on one superpower or another during all its existence. Starting with France, that supported Israel in its first 20 years of existence, including providing it with weapons, and following the French embargo in 1967, the Americans. There is no doubt that the Americans get their reward out of it, otherwise why would they bother? The question is: should Israel continue with it and at what price?
From the economic point of view, the American aid is currently $2.5B, mostly for defense expenditures. Undoubtedly, this helps Israel buy advanced American aircrafts and equipment, but not the most advanced, e.g. the F-22 Raptor was not sold to Israel. But, more importantly, more than 2/3 of the money is required, by the treaty between the countries, to be spent on military equipment. So, basically, this is money that helps the federal government in generating jobs for the American people. It also allows the US to control what Israel buys, not only in military contexts, but also, for example, which airliners will El-Al use. At least on one occasion, El-Al had to cancel a better deal with Airbus and buy from Boeing under heavy American pressure. And finally, and most disturbingly, it allows the US to pressure and in many case cancel weapons sales from Israel to India and China. Independence? Hardly.
Let's assume that Israel refuses to take any more American aid. Sure, it will have to cover this gap in its national budget. Let's see if it is possible. The Israeli budget is about $80B, so $2.5B are about 3% of this budget. However, since at least $2B out of the $2.5B are not spent domestically, Israel can just buy aircrafts at a lower rate, or simply not buy them at all. In the last F-16 deal with the US Israel bought 102 F-16s worth $70M each. That's about $7B. Assuming it was paid for in a decade, the cost per year is $700M, which could be saved entirely, or reduced to a more manageable value. In short, at least $0.5B-$1B a year can be saved by cutting down on military expenditures.
Another part is spending the money domestically. Israeli defense forces started buying fatigues, uniforms, and other equipment from American sources because it was "cheaper" as it came from the American aid and not in Israeli shekels. But this came with a price: many textile and low-tech industries, which relied on these purchases, had to close down, because they could not compete for contracts that excluded them from participating in them. If you take all the unemployment money paid to former employees of these industries and instead of spending it on unemployment, the same money can be spent to buy necessary equipment from these factories. Doing so would boost the entire economy and will actually reduce government spending. I don't have the figures, but I would guess that at least $0.2B are spent each year on these types of equipment. If spent domestically, the workers hired to meet this demand will also buy more, pay taxes, and in general contribute to the Israeli economy and budget, so the benefit can be even higher.
Now, assuming the $1B-$1.5B can be saved or "won back" without the American aid, it seems that the other $1-$1.5B (1.5%-2% of the budget) can be saved as well, either by cutting on defense budget or simply by making better deals, which will be easier if Israeli is no longer restricted to buying just from American companies. As a last resort: raise taxes or increase the deficit.
It seems that the price Israel and its democracy pay for the American aid is too great. If the US wants to turn Israel into a state in the union, let it be clearly stated so, let the Israelis and Americans vote on it, and I am quite sure it will cost more than $2.5B a year (Israel's population is about 7.5 million, which ranks it 12-13 between Washington and Virginia. I doubt if they get less money from the federal budget spent in their area). If, on the other hand, Israel wants to retain (or gain, depending on who you ask) its independence, it should free itself from the American aid money.