what I don't understand is that if that person realizes that trump would send all the money and weapons to israel with no strings attached. he'd do it because he hates brown people and his supporters (who give him what he really wants- undying idolation) hate brown people AND want the commencement of armageddon so their prophet litch returns and he does what they want so they keep loving him.
at least biden is using the soft power he has before he starts using hard power.
All it takes for Biden is to openly criticize Israel and stop selling them weapons (at least so that we won’t know it’s him) for like two months before everyone forgets. But no. Really shows how deep Israel’s dick is in US’s asshole.
If he says anything against Israel or stops aid, he'll be an "antisemite" and be attacked for that. The Israeli lobby has power and money, and they don't screw around. Plus, the media is dogshit and will never not attack Biden because it's "balanced" news.
Advising from the position of a friend is much more fruitful than advising as an enemy. I think Biden is wasting his time with Bibi. But it is an otherwise sound strategy. The genocide would have continued uninterrupted regardless what Biden did. What he did is definitely not a great look optically though for sure.
So don't jump down my throat please but I don't understand this article. I have a couple of question that I would like an actual answer to and haven't seen addressed anywhere else:
"Team America World Police" was a mockable idea back in the 90s and early 2000s because America stuck its nose everywhere - wanted or not.
Now here I see people attacking a president because he will not interfere in something that shouldn't be America's business? As far as I was aware, America leaving other countries the hell alone would be a good thing on the world stage, no? Why not get mad that any sitting president hasn't interfered in the Uyghgur Genocide? Why just this?
Why is this particular conflict that has been ongoing for ages something worth blaming a current president for not interfering in?
I don't have a stance on this, I'm just trying to understand because it doesn't make sense to me so please don't take that as aggressive.
Edit: Downvotes? For trying to figure out an international situation? Man, I don't understand you sometimes, Lemmy. You can be so nonsensically goddamn hostile...
So... (and again, I'm trying to parse the situation, not attacking so I'm asking all three respondents here the same question so I get a range of replies) Biden has been funding the war specifically and giving Israel weapons? Why? To what end? And please don't say genocide because that's not a tangible reward result for Biden or America. If they are doing the above, what do they get from it?
They are also always the major diplomatic driver towards talks between the Palestinian officials and Israel, historically speaking. The US is very much involved in the conflict.
So... (and again, I'm trying to parse the situation, not attacking so I'm asking all three respondents here the same question so I get a range of replies) Biden has been funding the war specifically and giving Israel weapons? Why? To what end? And please don't say genocide because that's not a tangible reward result for Biden or America. If they are doing the above, what do they get from it?
Understandably, they may have done so after WW2 and the creation of Israel to keep a "friendly" state in the region. That part makes sense.
worth blaming a current president for not interfering in?
The US president has 100% say in the amount of money and weapons Israel receives, he can order everything to stop like President Reagan in 1982. His refusal to stop genocide, like Reagan did, makes him complicit in Palestinian deaths and the destruction of their homes, culture, and civilization.
So... (and again, I'm trying to parse the situation, not attacking) Biden has been funding the war specifically and giving Israel weapons? Why? To what end? And please don't say genocide because that's not a tangible reward result for Biden or America. If they are doing the above, what do they get from it?
Yes, I get that. I was finally able to find several news sites reporting the amount of money funnelled to Israel in order to ensure the US has a small foothold in that area of the world. It seems a tad excessive, but politically understandable I suppose. Allies in that region are valuable, but goddamn that's a lot of money.
I also saw that this most recent payment structure was guaranteed for a certain time frame by Obama. Breaking the agreement off would be breaking treaties and guarantees. Not a great thing to do for America, but what's going on over there is not exactly a good look. I think that I now agree that Biden should pull aid from Israel.
Again, thank you for the discussion and explanations. It's nice when people respond instead of just mindlessly downvoting someone who is asking for details.
Republicans weren't gonna vote for him anyway, and with his current stance he's hemorrhaging progressive (mainly young) voters. This is the demographic that won him 2020.
The government would be to blame if they didn't put controls on you using that money to buy weapons for shooting civilians.
We pour so much money into Israel that goes straight to murdering civilians in an ethnic cleansing. The US is culpable and the president needs to be held accountable.
Israel also imports weapons from other countries. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute’s arms transfers database, 68% of Israel’s weapons imports from 2013 to 2022 came from the U.S. Another 28% came from Germany. Imports are funded in part by $3.3 billion of military aid provided annually by the U.S., along with $500 million for missile defense cooperation.
Since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, the U.S. has provided more than 5,000 MK-84 munitions, a type of 2,000-pound bomb. As of late December 2023, the U.S. had sent artillery shells, armored vehicles and basic combat tools to Israel, delivered in 230 cargo planes and 20 ships.
U.S. military aid to Israel also includes stockpiled weapons. For years, the Pentagon has stored weapons in Israel, presumably for use by the U.S. military. But the U.S. has allowed Israel to draw down some of these supplies during the Gaza conflict.
If the government keeps sending you beer, money marked "for buying beer only" and replacing any old beer you have with new, higher alcohol content beer, then yes, I'd say they are a little bit culpable for your drunkenness.
You can't buy alcohol with welfare benefits because the government puts limits on it. They could do the same with the money going to Israel but they don't because they want Israel to do what they're doing.
People don't want to admit the complexity of the situation they just want to feel special because they know the solution - except when you ask them about it of course, like if the iron dome stops working because Israel can't afford to maintain it and the idf can't afford to defend the country then do we just sit back and watch the Jewish people get murdered?
Would that genocide be ok? Or do we wait for the right amount of dead bodies before we do something to help? And what would we do to help? Everything would be far more expensive and bloody then what's happening now
But of course that's ok because they'll be against anything bad that happens and shake their head at the innaction that led to it
Well lets make it personal. Would you rather have somone intend to kill you, or have someone actually kill you? Intent matters sure but if you cant see the difference then I have little faith your being serious.
That is on Biden, he controls the reigns of power. He could give a call to Bibi and say the aid and weapons stop tomorrow unless you pull back and stop carpet bombing refugee camps.
Tell him to move to surgical strikes or nothing. Bulldozing cemeteries and bombing every school and hospital in occupied Gaza is a war crime and genocide.
Administration officials, who will all have direct approval from the White House, have been openly criticizing Israel, albeit in the weakest way possible. That is a shift, but it's just words and no where near substantial enough to back off and trust they're going to do the right thing. It's progress only insofar as the starting state was "the civilian deaths were unfortunate events no one could be blamed for because Israel is doing the most any nation could to prevent collateral damage and death".
Blinken said "there does remain a gap between exactly what I said when I was there, the intent to protect civilians, and the actual results that we’re seeing on the ground". And Biden said "I want them to be focused on how to save civilian lives. Not stop going after Hamas, but be more careful”. Weak and without any threat of actual action, but not the gaslighting of earlier.
The difference is that Biden IS the current president and is the one that sidestepped congress to give Israel aid without many strings attached. Yeah, come November, don't choose orange, but that doesn't mean Biden shouldn't face pressure in the meantime.
He isn't, but he's one third of the government (one half when it comes to foreign policy) and he's only been using that position to make the situation worse.
What a weird comment. As if Congress isn't universally despised by antiwar activists. Let me know how else protestors can feasibly make demands directly to an entire branch of government that isn't just one person.
Yeah and if I could vote for other states congress people then that would matter but until then I just got like two dudes who represent me there, probably different ones than you. Probably ones you've never heard of, so am I really gonna dox my district by talking about two specific dudes who few if any of you are familiar with?
