cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/138601

“That son of a bitch, Bibi Netanyahu, he’s a bad guy,” said Biden privately, according to Woodward. “He’s a bad fucking guy!”

Reads like a bloody Onion article.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-43 points
*

It’s so simple, even a random person on the internet with no knowledge of how any of it actually works has figured it all out!

Yeah! Just… break a decades-long agreement. There no nuance to this at all! No complications…

amirite?

There can’t possibly be any penalties or repercussions for that! I mean. A random internet citizen said to do it- so……

Easy peezy!

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points
*

So we throw away the “rules based international order” and return to the pre-1914 unilateral rules and all the brutal wars that bought? So much better, amirite? Might makes right, and we’ve got the might for now!

The US stance on Israeli leadership is decimating our ability to wield soft power influence. We are global hypocrites blocking ANY action, whilst expecting the world to fall in line to support Ukraine against Russian revanchism - even NATO members dissent from the US position. The global south is turning to China/OPEC+ trading blocs. They already tried to break the petrodollar, which would be a huge blow if successful.

Even taking a realpolitik approach, without soft power all those US military bases used for ‘power projection’ lose their local consent, and become occupation sites inside non-allied nations. The Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan is a chill spot for launching COIN drone missions - whereas the Conoco base in Syria is constantly under drone and rocket attack.

Supporting Bibi’s wars of aggression is a stupid play on multiple levels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points
*

I never said it was good to support it (though I’m sure that won’t stop people from reporting me for being a genocide apologist). Only that it’s a very complicated and nuanced thing to just assume it should be easy to simply stop because we want it to.

Nothing would make me happier than to see the issue resolved and for people to stop being hurt. But that’s not for me to decide. With a vote or otherwise.

And that’s because it’s a very complicated agreement. Nations don’t just decide to break them. Regardless of your strong opinions on the matter.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Maybe stop sending them billions in weapons then, eh?

I see at least three actions in that statement:

  1. Stop giving them billions in free weapons
  2. Stop giving them any weapons
  3. Stop them

#1 should have happened a long time ago imo, if not used as a leverage to prevent an Israeli ground invasion of Rafah, the West Bank, Lebanon, striking enrichment at Natanz. “Free bombs for crimes against humanity” is a bad moral play, bad politics, and bad diplomacy outside the US:Israel sphere.

#2 Is politically hard normally, impossible in an election cycle. I hate it, but here we are in the house we built. Make FEC the only campaign funds - it’s OUR government, not the highest bidder’s.

#3 The US’s geopolitical track record shows that we’ll tolerate some awful, terrible people if they’ll get ‘on our side’ even if there’s a trend of massive and foreseeable blowback, the diplomatic corps don’t learn lessons.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

The US military-industrial complex does not need you to defend it.

It might well be more complex than that, but you have every right to demand from your government to put its vast resources to use in order to tackle that complexity. Given the severity of the situation, I’d say you have a responsibility to.

Seeing such a tragedy unfold and going ‘oh, my government probably has a good reason to keep funding the active genocide, I’d hate to give some extra paperwork to our bureaucrats by making a fuss!’ is very defeatist, to put it politely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points
*

Demand as much you’d like. It’s a right to do so. However the problem is, we have assholes that are withholding their vote because their unreasonable demands aren’t being met. And yes, expecting a nation to simply just… end an agreement is unreasonable.

Because again- it’s NUANCED AND COMPLICATED.

And therein is the problem.

I’d love for just ONE of these people demanding we stop sending weapons to Israel to lay out a plan on exactly how to go about it. Because I’d love to see that! I’d LOVE to see it happen, because I HATE that it’s happening to begin with.

I’m sure the pentagon, the White House and even Palestine would love to see that as well.

But no. That won’t happen. Because it’s so much easier to just demand a thing you don’t understand, than it is to accept that what you demand is unreasonable in the context of what actually needs to happen for it to work.

And therein lies my point.

We ALL want that shit to stop. ALL of us. It’s a no brainer to want to end the supply of weapons to those that use them to harm innocent people. But saying “Look at me! I want the US to stop supplying arms to Israel! I’m a good guy! Give me internet points!” Isn’t helping anyone. I could do that shit all day. It doesn’t change anything.

Provide a seamless and workable plan to end the supply or stop assuming it’s that easy. Because it’s easy to say a thing should be done.

It’s MUCH harder to actually do it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*

Its really not that hard, the US just has to lay demands down to Israel and follow through with them. You stop making things worse by doing X by Y date, if you dont we stop providing you one type of weapon you need least. If you dont do it by Z date you lose something more important. Repeat until they realise you’re not bluffing.

The problem isn’t that its beyond the wit of man for the US to figure out how to use its immense leveage over Israel, its that it chooses not to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I think the issue people arguing with you that you don’t seem to get is that not everyone does want it to stop.

You seem blind to that reality that there is a large portion who arent even looking or talking that people are dying.

Who think what is going on and continuing is fine, or even good or right. And those people are in the positions to even try to limit any of it, and wont.

You’re not arguing honestly if you really claim the reason no one in power speaks against it is because it’s too hard? That seems really unlikely doesn’t it? “It’s difficult and we’re looking at legal options” and “we will continue to arm and defend them” are wholly different.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’d love for just ONE of these people demanding we stop sending weapons to Israel to lay out a plan on exactly how to go about it

I’m pretty sure the answer you’re going to get is “1. Stop sending them 2. Profit”

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

It’s not “nuanced and complicated”… if you’re a lemmy.ml shill trying to get Trump elected

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Since you are a person “with knowledge of how any of it works”, please share with the class what those penalties and repercussions are. Educate us poor ignorant “random Internet citizens”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points
*

I don’t have knowledge of how it works. And that is why you don’t seem me injecting my bullshit take on how to resolve it. I don’t claim to know how easy it is to just…. Break a decades long agreement.

I do however listen to the experts when they say that it’s incredibly complicated and detailed situation that goes back decades and involves two countries that have had a conflict since 1948 officially, and predates even that. And that it’s not so simple to just…. Break a decades long agreement.

See?

That’s how an understanding of NUANCE works. You start by learning that you don’t know everthing, and finish with the understanding that not everthing is as black and white as you’d like it to be- that there will always be others that know more about it than you do, and that you should listen to them.

And no, I’m not one of them. I’m simply advocating that you seek them out and listen to what they say. Because I guarantee you, they’re going to school you on what you thought you knew about how to navigate geopolitical diplomacy.

We can all hope that the powers that be find a way to end this as soon as possible. But we’re not helping anyone by assuming simplicity where there isn’t any.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Your argument is silly. There are laws on the book that empower the State Department to block arms transfers to Israel. The only way this can be undone is if Congress repealed the laws, which is hardly likely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

It literally is as simple as “stop arming their military with American tax dollars”

What part of this is so difficult to understand?

Oh, I know. It’s because you don’t give a shit. All this performative hand wringing and “nuance” talk just serving to distract from the fact that another dozen kids got shot in the head today with American 7.62.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

“You expect America, with its history of breaking promise and agreement and doing whatever the fuck it wants and giving two middle fingers to anyone that doesnt like it… to break its promises and agreements with Israel to prevent a genocide? THE NERVE! HOW UNCOUTH! WHY I NEVER!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points
*

Yet another person that thinks it’s simple and easy- while offering no solution.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

You’re right, they should keep supporting acts of genocide because doing anything else is just too darn hard.

Very well said!

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

It is.

It was easy enough for Reagan, Bush Sr, Bush Jr, and Obama.

It is easy enough to do again.

Seriously, do you have no idea about recent history?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Israel is going to impose “penalties” on the US? Are you high?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points
*

What do you think happens when America stops supplying Israel? Think they’ll just stop attacking Palestine?? They’ve already said that don’t really need America chipping in. And they don’t.

So… when America just- stops sending them arms, the next bidder steps in. That’s what happens.

And that’s going to be either China or Russia. And they wont have any restrictions like America does. (And before you say “what restrictions” I’d urge you to try and understand what’s involved in the pact). Russia and or China will absolutely allow them to decimate Palestine. And even help if necessary.

And if America doesn’t end up going to war with them over this, guess, who they’re all most likely turning their sights on once Palestine becomes a gravel pit?

This is just ONE example. There are MANY others. Pay attention when the experts on the sublet discuss this. You’ll learn something just as I did.

And lastly…. What could be done, at best, is America might be able to leverage additional conditions. And if you’ve been paying attention- they’ve been trying to do just that this entire time.

Again- nuance. Understand it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

So… when America just- stops sending them arms, the next bidder steps in. That’s what happens. And that’s going to be either China or Russia.

lol, holy shit

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Israel doesn’t get to threaten the world with our weapons. That’s why we have laws about this specific thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Soooo… what’s your solution? Solve the problem. Let’s see you explain away and solve something even experts in the field say is incredibly complicated.

Also. While you’re at it, go ahead and show your credentials that give you the authority to tell an entire administration that you know shit that they don’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Yeah so I used to work as a Civil Affairs soldier. So I know what is a war crime, what level is culpable for different war crimes, and the laws around the US giving different types of aid.

From our POV it’s actually pretty simple. Israel has committed massive war crimes that have literally indicted the Prime Minister. Even credible allegations of war crimes are enough to make sending military or cash aid illegal. The only things we’re legally allowed to send to Israel are food, construction material, medical support, and energy infrastructure.

So it’s not actually complicated, like, at all.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 7.5K

    Posts

  • 81K

    Comments