Should the US stop funding Israel?

[soandso]

Regardless if you are pro or anti Israel or don't care. Regardless of how you feel about Palestinians and what's currently happening in Gaza. Regardless of your thoughts about Netanyahu (and he's far from the only one who holds his positions within Israel).

Funding and arming Israel makes the US directly accountable for whatever Israel's actions are and that includes all Palestinian territory as well as Lebanon, Syria (which Israel has been bombing for years) and Yemen. Israel's wars become America's wars. Is that okay with you or do you think not funding and arming them would make the US more neutral in terms of being directly responsible?

[TheProle]

1. No

[brush]

227. We have no willing negotiating partner on either side. Warmonger Netanyahu...

seems determined to keep the hostilities going as long as possible so his corrupt ass isn't tried finally in Israel, and the Hamas leadership wants to destroy Isreal and doesn't really care how many Palestinians Netanyahu slaugthers.What's important to them is their agenda.

In other words, until the war leadership of Israel and Hamas is bypassed, US weapons should be withheld until we have willing negotiating partners, on both sides, to work towards a ceasefire and a two-state solution.Each time an agreement seems close, Netanyanu and/or Hamas stages another attack to scuttle the talks.

The world is being played and could be looking at continued hostilities for years that could lead to a wider war in the Levant, and possible catalyst to WWlll, until the warmongers on both sides are neutered.

[soandso]

232. Well said

[lindysalsagal]

243. They're not really fighting over gods, they're fighting over us. We should refuse them all.

See how long it takes to end.

[Amishman]

235. Agreed, Israel is a convenient proxy

Hamas, Hezbollah, and other psychotic terrorist groups in that region are not going away.

Israel gives a convenient partner for us, and target for them. Without a strong Israel, those groups would grow without restriction and attack abroad

[Trueblue1968]

253. Yes.

[Passionate Dem]

2. Should the US stop funding Israel

YES!!!.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

3. Absolutelyfuckingnot,

and VP Harris has been very, very clear on this, she's not going to call for withholding aid to Israel nor will she hamper Israel's ability to defend itself against those that wish to destroy Israel, and, quite frankly, this bullshit thread is just that, bullshit.

[soandso]

4. Hold up!

Why is the thread bullshit? I didn't advocate for any position but it's a subject of constant debate.

[Demsrule86]

7. It is BS actually...I think you forgot Hamas attacked Israel.

Welcome to DU...

[MarineCombatEngineer]

8. And Hizbollah was planning a major attack against Israel and Israel pre-empted the attack,

but I guess, according to some, Israel isn't allowed to do so, they should wait for the missiles in the air before they can respond.

[soandso]

12. I'm not talking about the latest events

Regardless of recent actions, I mean as long term policy.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

16. And I answered it.

VP Harris has made it crystal clear that that's not happening, so this conversation is moot.

[dickthegrouch]

55. With respect, the Abortion question is not moot just because the SCROTUS has ruled.

The government is, or should be, By the people, for the people, of the people.
Kamala needs to know how all of us feel.
She's as good as said, all of us get some input.

Israel is supposed to have a briliant internal defense organization, Mossad. Where the hell were they? Where are they now?
How come they haven't yet found the majority of the perps of the original attack, or even the hostages?

I think both sides are equally at fault, but Hamas started it, so they are more at fault than others.
Overall, IMHO no one is innocent in this.

[Jack Valentino]

113. Every conversation on this site is 'moot', since they appear on some obscure website

on the internet by anonymous posters who can't do anything much more than discuss these issues.

Shall we just stop talking about all of it now ?

[MarineCombatEngineer]

126. ....

Shall we just stop talking about all of it now ?

Do whatever the hell you want to do.

[HUAJIAO]

203. It is not moot at all.

Regardless of the official position of the US, people are allowed to discuss their opinions and views.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

218. So show me where I said people aren't allowed to discuss it.

I'll wait.
Just because I said the issue is moot in no way means that it can't be discussed.

[Demsrule86]

36. double no...

[yagotme]

174. Recent actions by Hamas is what is dictating Israel's current and longer response.

As long as Hamas is controlling Gaza, and launching attacks toward Israel, Israel needs assistance. Other surrounding terroristic nations are doing the same, so why should we allow Israel to be overrun by these terrorists?

[soandso]

200. I agree that Hamas instigated this

and this is the response that they wanted. Why do you think that "we" are the ones who need to assure Israel's protection (any more than the US should, for example, be responsible for protecting the citizens of Myanmar/Burma)?

[yagotme]

220. These groups often have as their rallying cry, "Death to America!"

Israel is also in their chants. Israel is the only nation in that area, basically, that is taking the brunt of this, and fighting back. With our assistance. Should a country that desires our death, as a nation, and otherwise, and works to that end, not receive some of what they're dishing out???

[soandso]

224. If the US wasn't in the middle east

I doubt America would even be on the radar of those who chant that stuff.

[yagotme]

230. So, we need to "get out" of the Middle East?

All those countries that get our donations are going to be pissed. (BTW, America has been targeted by these individuals/nations for a LONG time. In case you forgot.)

[soandso]

231. Yes, the US needs to get out

Why create enemies?

[yagotme]

236. Some of those countries hate us, just because of who/what we are.

Have you heard the "Great Satan" mantra? They hate us, because we don't worship like they do, and are willing to kill us over it.

[soandso]

254. That sounds awfully "they hate us for freedoms"

Would you like freedom fries with that?

Look, there are two issues. One is that Islam is a conquering religion and we are infidels to them. There may be a little of that going on (abroad) but the real issue is US interference in the middle east. In Iran it goes back to the 50s and the overthrow of their government but that was followed by Iraq, Syria and Libya and, of course the long support for Israel. As I said, if the US wasn't involved in the middle east, it wouldn't be an issue. When it comes to support for Israel, which is not going to change, I don't think it has anything to do with religion but the fact that Palestinians have been driven from their homes and off their land. Now, because of what Hamas did on Oct 7, it's gone beyond that.

[yagotme]

258. Freedom of religion, yes.

We do not follow the teachings of Mohammed, as a whole, therefore, we are infidels, like you say, and deserve death if we do not convert. You do an excellent job of making my points for me. I still don't know why we go down these paths, as you seem to agree with me.

And as far as support for Israel, if we hadn't been supporting them, they probably wouldn't exist today. Would that be OK??

[TheKentuckian]

180. And then the refrain would be that the attack was allowed to happen.

[krawhitham]

181. OH, the "Bush Doctrine". That always works out so well

[MarineCombatEngineer]

192. You don't think that Israel has the right to launch a pre-emptive attack against a sworn enemy

that's preparing for a massive attack them?
JFC, just when I thought I saw it all.............................

Don't give me this "Bush Doctrine" crap, if the US was in a war against any enemy, don't you think that we would pre-empt any attack against us?
Oh wait, that's already happened in the Biden Admin., in case you missed it:

https://apnews.com/article/yemen-houthis-us-military-strikes-dec1682fcb279904f84a8246e987f3fb

There's not a competent military that wouldn't do the same thing in war time.

[soandso]

10. I didn't forget anything

and I know that Hamas instigated this latest round of conflict. I'm not arguing that point but looking at the big picture (past and future) and asking about the policy of committing to fund and arm Israel, in general.

[Demsrule86]

38. The big picture is no...Israel has the right to defend themselves...I think Hamas is making sure to cause as much

death and destruction as possible. I also think as a woman, I'm not too fond of
their policies. Did you know the beheadings have begun again in Afghanistan?

[HUAJIAO]

202. This is not so simple.. the 'feud' goes back thousands of years.

It did not start with Hamas attacking Israel.

[Sky Jewels]

5. Yes.

Immediately.

[Demsrule86]

6. No I don't.

[Swede]

9. Should the US stop supporting Ukraine? NATO?

[soandso]

14. Beyond the scope of this thread

[Swede]

23. So we only support some of our allies?

When the going gets tough?

[soandso]

27. The US is a party to the NATO treaty

It has no treaty with Israel or Ukraine. Memorandums of understanding perhaps? Not sure.

[Basso8vb]

226. Some good info here.

https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-israel/#:~:text=The%20United%20States%20and%20Israel%20have%20signed%20multiple%20bilateral%20defense,of%20Forces%20Agreement%20(1994).

[onandup]

114. Israel is the aggressor, Ukraine is not

nm

[sarisataka]

135. ???

October 7 has no relevance to what is happening in Gaza?

[Swede]

139. Gazans crossed the border and murdered a bunch of kids at a concert and old folks in their houses.

It was all over the news.

[yagotme]

171. Ukraine recently attacked into Russia.

According to your reasoning, Ukraine is now the aggressor, right?

[onandup]

206. Israel and Russia are aggressors in the broader sense

Russia is trying to take Ukraine's sovereignty. In the course of the war Ukraine may strike within Russia, but Russia is still the aggressor.

Similarly, Israel is primarily responsible for their conflict in that they deny Palestinian sovereignty.

[yagotme]

221. Gaza pretty much had sovereignty, had they chosen to exercise it properly.

But, here we all are...

[onandup]

223. At what point did Gaza have sovereignty?

nm

[yagotme]

229. (sigh) Here you go:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/who-governs-palestinians#:~:text=In%20the%201990s%2C%20the%20PLO%20and%20Israel%20signed,two%20territories%20would%20eventually%20constitute%20a%20Palestinian%20state.
Since the '90's.

Area A, which consists of most of Gaza and about 17 percent of the West Bank, is the most densely populated and urbanized. It is designated as fully Palestinian controlled under Oslo, including for civil affairs and internal security issues. However, Israel has waged an extensive military campaign in Gaza since October 2023 with the goal of eliminating Hamas, and it has therefore imposed more-stringent movement controls in the territory.

Again, if they hadn't gone down the terrorist path, intervention from Israel wouldn't have been necessary, and they could have been well on their way to full recognition. But, they didn't do that, so, here we are.

[onandup]

233. Israel has blockaded Gaza for 17 years

Which is like locking someone in your basement but letting them manage whatever you allow to go in.

[yagotme]

237. So, what is the reason that they were blockaded?

Could it be, terroristic attacks against Israel? You're just helping me make my point. My prior posts point to this, so I'm not sure why we're going down this road.

[onandup]

239. To impoverish and antagonize the population

and strengthen militant tendencies. Rinse, repeat.

[yagotme]

241. You don't think suicide bombings and assaults on schools had anything to do with it?

Strange..

Perhaps we should ask Egypt why THEY built a wall (as only 1/2 of Gaza is "blockaded" (walled/fenced) by Israel). The other half is the Sea, and Egypt's wall. Perhaps the attacks against Egypt had something to do with that too, or is Egypt trying to impoverish and antagonize them, as well???

[onandup]

245. Israel blocks entry or exit by air and sea

and Israel created the catastrophic situation in Gaza.

Egypt doesn't want to facilitate an ethnic cleansing, nor do they want the security issues it would raise. It's bizarre to hold Egypt accountable when Israel has created the crisis and can end it.

[yagotme]

259. You missed the main question:

Why did Egypt build THEIR wall? At Israel's request? Make it "symmetrical" for aesthetics' sake? Nothing better to do that day?

[onandup]

263. It was built when Hamas took control

Hamas is no friend of Egypt and vice versa. Also Egypt is an ally of the US and also has an uneasy but functioning relationship with Israel.

It's important to note any goods flowing into Gaza from Egypt are subject to Israel's approval. So Israel controls all food and material into Gaza.

[yagotme]

264. And here I thought that the "wall" was for an "open air prison".

To keep people in. Like suicide bombers, and such.

[onandup]

265. You thought correctly - they have created an open air prison

Israel is justified in a secure border fence with Gaza, no doubt. But they also allow little or no entry or exit by sea, air, or the border with Egypt.

[sarisataka]

266. It is a lack of agency, very common in the area

Does Egypt have control over their territory and action? There is a wall on the border, Egypt said they built it but who is to say that is what happened? Is there any way to know the truth? What is the purpose of the wall or is it just "there" for no reason?

Much like Hamas lacks agency. The hostages were found dead. How did they die? Was it the gunshots in their bodies? Maybe but we have no witnesses. Yes, Hamas said they gave orders to execute hostages and admitted they killed them, but what does anyone really know? Who is to say what really happened?

[EX500rider]

247. "Israel has blockaded Gaza for 17 years" Israel did not control the Gaza/Egypt border for 17 years

[MarineCombatEngineer]

234. Israel is the aggressor?

How is Israel the aggressor?
Who attacked who first?
I guess for some, no matter the circumstances, Israel will always be at fault.
Transparency is a great thing, it brings out the....................never mind, what I have to say about this post would be against the TOS, so I'll leave it at that.

[lark]

187. Netanyahu is Trump, the same liar and cheater and fraud and is keeping this going for his own benefit.

As long as he's the premier, we should stop all shipments of offensive arms and should reduce our overall support. We send them money and they have universal healthcare, we have few health care rights and those will be eliminated if tcf steals the election or nothing is done about the traitorous 6 (Scotus R's).

[TheFarseer]

31. Not the same

Ukraine is in danger of losing their entire country to a powerful aggressor who attacked with no justification. Israel is (albeit not without some justification) arguably trying to take someone else’s land. Also, they do not need our help to defeat an enemy with virtually no military capability. Not the same at all.

[edisdead]

81. If we don't fund Israel Hamas is NOT who they have to worry about.

Without US Israel will be wiped off the planet.

[TheFarseer]

110. If they keep up the low key genocide

They won’t have a friend in the world. Eventually we will even be pressured to not support them. I support 100% giving them defensive weapons and if, God forbid, they were attacked by Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Jordan or whoever, I would support giving them whatever help they needed. But that’s not the situation we are facing.

[sheshe2]

160. What is a "low key genocide"?

It is either a genocide or not.

[maxsolomon]

185. The occupied west bank is being steadily commandeered by fanatical right-wing settlers.

It involves walls, security checkpoints, arrests, intimidation, and killings. Pretty sure you're aware of what has been happening over the Netanyahu era.

That's what is meant by "low key genocide". Maybe there's a better word than "genocide"?

[edisdead]

82. No

Without US Israel will be wiped off the planet.

[orthoclad]

172. We slowly gave Ukraine older F16s, while

we just gave Bibi 25 F-35s. No comparison. One is a country defending its borders. The other is a far-right govt committing genocide. The far right gets state of the art.

One country grows grain. The other is in the middle of oil fields. I wonder who calls the shots?

[orthoclad]

11. YES!

stop enabling murder and genocide.

[womanofthehills]

13. Yes - and use that money for health care for all

Israel has free health care and we send them our tax money. Almost every country in the world has free health care.

And dental and glasses should be on Medicare.

The headless babies and burnt to a crisp babies are increasing onTwitter. That we are supplying the bombs doing this - is a sad thing for everyone and very sad for our children to view too.

It’s causing division in our country too - our kids see hundreds of videos of dead and suffering kids on their phones - they are sad so they protest- and then they get attacked. I hope Kamala can end this mess.

And now the horrible videos of the poor people in the West Bank being kicked off their land and their houses being stolen - Why do we want our country to be connected to this?

It’s all so sad.

[Demsrule86]

40. Right that is so not happening. And the idea that we should abandon an ally for the reasons you cite.

[krawhitham]

179. Allies normally bring something to the table, that is Israel bringing except a possible WWIII

[sarisataka]

184. Let's play devil's advocate...

what does Ukraine bring to the table except a possible WW3?

Even before the invasion, Ukraine was not a significant US trade partner. We have a much larger trade with Israel. The US does not need Ukraine as a buffer between Russia and NATO. Belarus is essentially an extension of Russia so there is already a direct path to invade.

Sometimes you choose and support an ally because it is the right thing to do, not because it is profitable. For example when a foe wants to utterly destroy your ally.

[mjvpi]

136. Thanks for your post. He fact that Israeli's have universal health care, we don't and we subsidize them slays me.

[sheshe2]

162. These 'kids' are noticing all these videos?

It’s causing division in our country too - our kids see hundreds of videos of dead and suffering kids on their phones - they are sad so they protest- and then they get attacked. I hope Kamala can end this mess.

Where are all these 'kids' and their protests over our school shootings, have they seen those videos? Have they protested the dead and suffering of families that have lost loved ones? Are they calling out the Republicans and the gun lobby in this country? Were they sad and felt the need to protest?

Protests done peacefully are powerful tools, see the Women's March, however vandalizing property causing thousands in damages is not. Protests that intimidate innocents, blocking traffic that affect daily life for many, is not the answer.

And now the horrible videos of the poor people in the West Bank being kicked off their land and their houses being stolen - Why do we want our country to be connected to this?

I think these kids should know our own history before they protest
another country's history of violence.

Why do we want our country to be connected to this?

[EX500rider]

248. "The headless babies and burnt to a crisp babies are increasing onTwitter." What dark corners of X do you hang out in?

[Danmel]

15. No.

Israel, flawed as it's current government might be, has an absolute right to exit sc we need Israel as a partner in the Middle East.
Don't forget how this started.

[soandso]

22. Israel's right exist is not the question

They DO exist and lots of countries exist with or without US funding.

[Demsrule86]

43. Israel has the entire Islamic nations against them and would not exist without our help. It is also in our

best interest. Hamas attacked Israel and is ultimately responsible.

[Danmel]

50. Exactly

What allies do we have surrounded by enemies. Who exactly do we not help?

[HUAJIAO]

205. This started thousands of years ago...

[pwb]

17. This is a divisive question.

With assumptions you made.

[soandso]

19. What assumptions did I make?

[DFW]

18. Should the civilized world have ceased trade with the USA when Trump took the Oval?

The Trump administration used customs revenue and taxes from that trade to meet with Kim, Putin, and line his own pockets while a million of us died due to neglecting Covid (Genocide Donald? I didn’t think so).

[sarisataka]

20. Should the US abandon Israel to the terrorists

and their sponsor countries that have pledged to eliminate the "Zionists"?

No.

Although we could claim, like German citizens of the 30's, we didn't know what was happening; it would be as much a lie now as it was then.

[soandso]

25. Is not funding and arming Israel

the equivalent of abandoning Israel to terrorists?

[sarisataka]

28. We have seen the waves of rockets and missiles that their enemies are willing to launch at Israel

the Iron Dome has a finite number of missiles. Without the US to help resupply it will eventually be overwhelmed.

So yes, it would be abandoning them to terrorists

[soandso]

30. Okay, that's a fair point

and I guess you're saying that only the US can re-supply those defensive missiles when they run out? I don't know anything about the Iron Dome but if that is the case, does the US need to to pay for the those or can Israel simply buy them, out of their own defense budget (in your opinion)?

[sarisataka]

39. It appears it is a joint effort

The initial funding and development of the Iron Dome system was provided and undertaken by Israel.[31] This allowed for the deployment of the first two Iron Dome systems.[32] Subsequently, funding for additional Iron Dome systems—along with repeated funding for the supply of the interception missiles—has been provided by the United States.[32] From 2011 to 2021, the US contributed a total of US$1.6 billion to the Iron Dome defense system,[11] with another US$1 billion approved by the US Congress in 2022.[12]

***

On 17 January 2014, Obama signed the fiscal year 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act. The bill provides $235 million for Israel to procure the Iron Dome system.[44] The Israeli government has also agreed to spend more than half the funds the United States provides for the Iron Dome system in the United States. Funds going to U.S. contractors will increase to 30 percent in 2014 and 55 percent in 2015 from 3 percent previously, according to a U.S. Missile Defense Agency report to Congress.[45]

On 1 August 2014, Congress approved a measure to deliver an additional $225 million in aid to Israel, with the aim of replenishing funds for the Iron Dome system in the midst of the conflict between Israel and Hamas. Following the signing of bill, for which "the Senate and House of Representatives as well as Republicans and Democrats set[ting] aside differences to advance Israel's emergency request," the White House stated that "The United States has been clear since the start of this conflict that no country can abide rocket attacks against its civilians" and that it "supports Israel's right to defend itself against such attacks."[46][47] Senate Report 113-211 from the U.S. Government Publishing Office, which accompanied text H.R. 4870,[48] recommended an increase in funding for the program for FY2015. The report calculates "U.S. investment in Iron Dome production since fiscal year 2011" to be over $1 billion.[49]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome#Funding

Given the state of near constant attacks Israel has faced in the last decade, Israel is not able to keep the system at 100% without US support.

[soandso]

52. Thanks for that info

IMO, money provided to Israel, a portion of which must be spent on US manufactured weapons, is a form of support to the MIC which = jobs in those particular states.

[Demsrule86]

44. Not at all...It is not. Israel is not a Terrorist. It is a country who's people were viciously attacked by Hamas.

[soandso]

46. I think the question was

would not arming and funding Israel be the equivalent of abandoning them to terrorists. That Hamas attacked on Oct 7 is not in dispute.

[mjvpi]

138. What is the revenge ratio that you see as adequate? 50 Palestinian deaths for each Israeli? 60-1? 100-1?

I’m serious. I live in a country where all men(people) are created equal. What is the end game in Gaza?

[yagotme]

173. "Revenge rate?" You Do know why Israel is attacking Hamas, right?

What was OUR "adequate revenge rate ratio" in Dec of 1941? The Japanese were the ones that attacked us, but we concentrated on the Nazi's in Europe first. It wasn't primarily about "revenge", but to make sure they weren't capable of doing it again. Same as Israel.

[Eko]

213. Comparing WW2 and oct 7th is a bad argument.

The attack on Pearl Harbor decimated our Pacific fleet. We lost 19 U.S. Navy ships, including 8 battleships which effectively left us open to invasion by the Japanese on the west coast. While that did not happen on the west coast they did invade the Aleutian Islands which are part of Alaska and managed to hold it for over a year. The islands would have allowed Japan to send bombers from there to attack cities on the west coast. They also sent 9 subs to the west coast that attacked ships and military forts, some of which did carry bombers that bombed places on the West Coast. 10 hours after the attack on Pearl Harbor there were coordinated Japanese attacks on the American-held Philippines, Guam, and Wake Island and on the British Empire in Malaya, Singapore, and Hong Kong.

[yagotme]

222. I believe you misunderstand the gist of my post.

Gaza is already in striking range of Israel, so a lot of your post is moot. The point of mine was, we were attacked, and should have we been held to a "revenge ratio" like the other poster feels Israel should be subject to? My answer is no, for the reason I stated, which also would apply to Israel. So that Hamas is no longer able to commit terror acts.

[Eko]

225. I understood the gist of your post.

It was about the revenge ratio but using the Japanese attacking us is just a bad argument. We lost 19 naval ships in the attack at pearl harbor plus the attack and the loss of American-held Philippines, Guam, and Wake Islands 10 hours later. Just the attack on the Philippines and Pearl shows how bad your argument is. General Douglas MacArthur had to retreat from the Philippines. Remember when he said "I shall return"? Philippines. Battle of Bataan? Bataan death march? Philippines. 76,000 troops were captured plus 10,000 killed. Airfields and all planes lost? Philippines. The attack by the Japanese and Hamas are in no way close to each other and using that to argue what Israel should do in response to their attack is just wrong.

[mjvpi]

140. What is the revenge ratio that will make you happy. 50 to 1? 80 to 1? 100 to 1?

I’m serious. I live in a country where all men(people) are created equal. What is the end game in Gaza?

[Ponietz]

21. Why help terrorists hiding beneath women's skirts and baby diapers?

Palestinians danced in the streets with joy after the October 7th atrocities.

But, should the U.S. leverage Israel to remove so-called settlers from the West Bank? Absolutely

[soandso]

24. Terrorists should not ever be helped, imo

But that wasn't my question. Your answer seems to imply that not funding and arming Israel is the equivalent of "helping" terrorists. Is that an accurate interpretation?

The part about the West Bank poses another question and is worthy of a new thread: Should the US control Israel's policy/call the shots when it funds and arms them?

[Demsrule86]

45. No, we should not. Israel must rule themselves. I believe BiBi's days are numbered. He will go to prison.

We do not need to run a country thousands of miles from us.

[H2O Man]

26. Perhaps a better question

would be should there be a pause in military aid while Netanyahu is in power. There is zero chance that the US will stop in the sense of ending its relationship with Israel. Yet there are important issues that many -- though not all, by any means -- people who are pro-Israel but opposed to Netanyahu would like addressed. One is the absolute need for the people of Israel be safe from the attacks from the outside. The second is the two-state solution, which would require Israel to not only stop stealing land on the West Bank (or in the future of Gaza), but the return of what has been stolen by force.

[soandso]

35. That last bit is complicated

and would never happen. Palestine was put under British control after WWI. Prior to that, the Ottoman Empire was in control. The British gave part of Palestine to Jews in the Balfour Declaration. That cannot be undone. It's impossible, in fact. Settler expansion into the West Bank could be undone as it was in Gaza. Easily? No, but possible. Speaking purely hypothetically.

[Demsrule86]

47. No, Israel did not start this and Hamas must not be rewarded in any way.

[atreides1]

84. Hamas started this round.

But, that doesn't give Israel the right to torture and sexually abuse Palestinian prisoners! Netanyahu will keep this going until there isn't a single living Palestinian in Gaza...while the illegal settlers in the West Bank continue to steal the property of Palestinians with the open assistance of Israeli law enforcement and the IDF.

But, yes...let's keep blaming Hamas for everything, because it gives some people a warm feeling...and allows them to ignore the atrocities being committed by Israel!!!

[yagotme]

175. A thought for you to ponder...

Would Israel be in Gaza right now, torturing and raping prisoners, as you say, if Hamas would have left Israel alone, and not attacked them?

[LiberaBlueDem]

29. Yes

We have to get Israel under control

[Angleae]

32. If we stop funding Israel, they'd get it from somewhere else.

China would step in in an instant.

[soandso]

33. China would be willing to support Israel?

Or do you mean Israel would purchase from China, out of Israel's own money? I'm not convinced that China would agree to either, but don't know.

[Demsrule86]

49. I don't think that was the meaning...

[soandso]

53. That's why I asked

the poster for clarification.

[LexVegas]

34. No. nt

[Beastly Boy]

37. Should the US stop funding any of its allies?

Or is there anything about Israel that makes it different?

Should Iran stop funding Hamas? Hezbollah? The Houthis? Putin? Assad?

Just random questions, right?

[soandso]

54. Those are all good questions

but I specifically asked about Israel because it's been such a contentious issue and directly effects US politics, more than any other foreign aid.

[Beastly Boy]

92. Ukraine has been a contentious issue, and it directly affects US politics.

So is Afghanistan
So is Jordan,
So is Egypt, Ethiopia, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and so on.

They all directly affect US politics, but only Israel gets to be contentious.

[soandso]

100. Are you seeing any protests

regarding the other countries you mentioned? Any college campuses taken over or Muslims or Ukrainians harassed?

[Beastly Boy]

130. No. And that adds to my suspicion.

[soandso]

141. Meaning what

that the protests and uproar are not so much about dead Palestinians but anti Jew and anti Israel sentiment? If so, I would agree. I think it's both and have been shocked at some of the shit we've seen these past few months. If the US didn't support Israel with money and weapons, it would take away a lot of the pretext for what we've seen but I'd guess that you and many others would argue that that sentiment is evidence for why the why US must continue the support. I don't know what the answers are and how this will play out but I hate seeing it played out on American soil. As I tried to say in my OP, as long as the US funds this war, the US owns responsibility for it.

[Celerity]

41. Absolutely, in terms of military funding. Fuck BiBi and the RW religio-fascist nutters who are his base.

[mjvpi]

142. Bingo. Demand to know his end game. In the eyes of the ICC he is a war criminal.

[Nanjeanne]

42. Yes. It's the only way to pressure Israel and bring hostages back.

[Demsrule86]

51. Giving Hamas what they want makes more hostage taking and conflict likely...so a big no. Hamas gets nothing.

[DeepWinter]

48. No

I myself and my circle of friends who are Democrats all fully support Israel and would even be fine with increasing funding. The more the Pro-Hamas idiots in the streets scream, the more I donate to Pro-Israel groups.

[lees1975]

56. It's not possible, practical or moral for the US to stop funding Israel, given our role in its creation as a state.

The Holocaust during the Second World War simply increased the pressure from Zionists who had been pressing to expand Jewish settlement in Palestine since the Treaty of Versailles that ended World War 1 gave political and economic control of that part of the old Ottoman Empire to the British. That was the first time non-Muslims controlled the Middle east since the scattered states established during the Crusades a thousand years earlier briefly controlled the region, and before that, since the collapse of the Byzantine Empire which was more or less Christian control of Palestine, rather than an independent Jewish state. That had not existed in Palestine since the days of the Maccabees and the Hasmonean Dynasty before the time of Christ.

So my answer to the question is no, that would not be consistent with US policy and it would be contradictory to our position and the support we gave to Israel's establishment.

That didn't work out the way either the British, or Americans, envisioned it. Their, and our, bigotry when it came to the treatment of the Arabic population in the Middle East was as bad as our historic bad treatment of Native Americans in the settlement of our own country. And the militancy and radicalization of Arabic populations in the region can all be traced to the bad mistakes the western powers have made in dealing with people who live in the region. A good expected outcome is never going to result from attempts to remove the sovereignty of one group of people in order to create a different sovereign state right on top of them, resulting in mass displacement, inevitable violence and oppression. And much of that is due to the fact that in spite of the Holocaust, anti-Semitism made Europe, including the western democracies and the United States, hostile to Jewish emigration and settlement.

So now we've been in it for 70 years, and there isn't a way to go back. So no, we can't cut Israel off. Nor can we tolerate continued violence, aggression and fuel for terrorism in the region. We have to figure out how to resolve the problems that disrupt the peace and lead to incidents like October 7 and the subsequent attack on Gaza. It's long, complicated, and expensive. It will take real visionary leadership to make it work, from all interested parties. I haven't seen that kind of vision since Jimmy Carter.

[FullySupportDems]

115. That was a good bit of history

Thank you for it, you sound very knowledgeable. If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to ask your opinion about calling Israel an apartheid state. Do you think it is? And would it be fair to point to that as one driver of the terrorism from Hamas?

[lees1975]

132. That's a good question.

There are Arabs, Palestinians by geographic origin, who are Israeli citizens, about 20% of the population, who can vote, participate in the Democracy and economy, and some are in the military. Like the United States, though, the majority live in predominantly Arab neighborhoods and communities, which tend to be considerably more impoverished than the Jewish settlements and communities. That does not include the West Bank population, the vast majority of whom are not citizens, but residents of an area previously under Arab rule and taken in the 1967 6 day war.

One of my close friends in college was an Israeli Arab who lived in Nazareth, and whose family had been Christian, and Evangelical (Baptist) for generations. He said that there were separate schools in the town for Jewish and Arab students, and they were really pretty segregated. The Arab Christians had it a little better than the Muslims did. His resolution to the problem was to emigrate to the United States.

I think most of the terrorism is the result of a radicalization of segments of the Islamic population that has formed as the number of Jewish immigrants into Israel expanded rapidly since World War 2. There were policies and plans put in place to control the in-migration of European Jews into Israel under the conditions set forth by the western allies, to avoid displacing the Arabic population and to equalize the political power which led to some agreement among the existing Palestinian population, who had been there with only a tiny minority of Jewish people living in a small section of Jerusalem for ver a thousand years. They had made Palestine a part of the "Levant," which they believed was their Allah-given territory. But that didn't work out as the inflow of Jewish people from Eastern Europe, mostly holocaust survivors from areas the Germans didn't actually decimate, Russia and Ukraine in particular, overwhelmed the Arab territories. There's been a lot of violation of treaties and peace terms on both sides that's led to the fighting and of course, the Palestinians do not see that Israel has an unquestioned right to return to a land they have not occupied or ruled since before the time of Christ, nor do they appreciate their people being uprooted from their property and homes, and moved elsewhere to live in poverty as refugees. That's what breeds terrorism.

[FullySupportDems]

150. Thank you very much

I truly appreciate your insightful answer.

[JohnSJ]

57. No. The only ones suggesting that would like to see Israel destroyed

[buzzycrumbhunger]

58. Yes, absolutely.

Given the Zionist agenda to wipe out the entirety of the people who lived there first, it irks me that OUR tax dollars are helping to fund genocide. Yes, there are innocent people on both sides and heinous people on both sides, but the parallels between Netanyahu’s campaign and Nazi Germany’s are ridiculously ironic. Why the hell should we not take a stand against it? Withholding money seems the obvious way to take a stand—and supporting war crimes is just a fucking bad look for the US.

[Sky Jewels]

61. Agree. It sickens me that

my tax dollars are aiding genocide and the starvation and maiming of tens of thousands of innocents and the leveling of their homes and hospitals and schools. It’s beyond disgusting and I’m so ashamed my country is helping the IDF carry out its revolting, evil mission.

FUCK Netanyahu!

[yagotme]

176. "Who lived there first..."

Who DID live there first? How far back in history do we go?

[buzzycrumbhunger]

270. I'm thinking of this...

[yagotme]

271. Why are we stopping in 1946? nt

[mcar]

59. No

[kimbutgar]

60. Yes stop funding until Bibi N steps down and there is sane leadership we can return to funding them

[soandso]

63. What do you think would be done differently

with Netanyahu out? How would they handle this ongoing conflict? I know that many want a deal and the return of the hostages. Would they be willing to free Palestinian prisoners, declare a cease fire, withdraw Israeli troops from Gaza and/or the West Bank? I sure don't know.

[Israeli]

166. I dont know either

all I have is one vote and it goes to Meretz always has done , on pure ideological reasons .

So I give you this :

It's Ideology That Drives Netanyahu, Not Just Power

by Gideon Levy
Aug 25, 2024

Maybe we haven't sufficiently denigrated his lifestyle; in any event, he came by all the denigration honestly. But take note that his many detractors refrain from attacking him on one issue: his ideology. As far as all his critics are concerned, he has no ideology, only a deep desire to remain in office, a lust for power that knows no bounds. To them, the members of the anyone-but-Bibi brigade, he is a hollow opportunist, devoid of any worldview. If he ever had one, he sold it long ago, just to stay in power.

Haaretz Editor-in-Chief, Aluf Benn, thinks otherwise. According to him, Benjamin Netanyahu does have an overriding goal, and it is not necessarily staying in power. Netanyahu, says Benn, is fighting for a much greater objective: the permanent occupation of the Gaza Strip.

To reach it, the prime minister is willing to pay a heavy price, including abandoning the hostages and the risk of a regional war, provided that Israel controls Gaza forever. No one ever analyzed Netanyahu's motives in this way. The question of what motivates him is still crucial.

Benn's answer does not diminish the need to fight Netanyahu, but it does disclose the intellectual poverty of his opponents. They don't attack him for his ideology, only for his obscene lifestyle, because it's much more convenient for them.

It is also easy to attack Netanyahu over the October 7 failure because of his supreme responsibility, but this camp refrains from criticizing him for his worldview because it knows full well that it has no real ideological differences with him and no workable plan for pulling Israel out of the nadir into which it has sunk.

Of all the possible candidates to replace Netanyahu – Yoav Gallant, Benny Gantz, Gadi Eisenkot, Naftali Bennett, Avigdor Lieberman, Gideon Sa'ar, Yossi Cohen and Yair Golan – there is not a single one who is willing to release all the Palestinian prisoners and withdraw from the entire Gaza Strip. In other words, there is no one who is genuinely in favor of ending the war and freeing the hostages. There is also no one who intends ever to withdraw to the pre-1967 borders.

This being the case, they avoid criticizing Netanyahu's plan. The crimes and failures of his government, which not only caused Israel to be accused of genocide, but also turned it into a rotten, corrupt and dysfunctional Third World country, are dispiriting. No less dispiriting is the fact that not one of his clamorous critics is proposing something different.

Netanyahu's ideology is much more dangerous than his flamboyant lifestyle and his corruption. Contrary to the opinion of his critics, he has adhered to his ideology over the years. Netanyahu never believed in agreements with the Palestinians. He is a devout believer in living by the sword forever; he has never retreated from it.

Ever since the transparent and almost admitted trick of "the Bar-Ilan speech," Netanyahu has acted and prospered: He took the possibility of establishing a Palestinian state off the table for good, and prevented all engagement with other solutions.
He never believed in a diplomatic solution, and remained loyal to his belief. Next is conquering Gaza, and making this a permanent occupation adds another set of bricks to his plan to "solve" the Palestinian issue by war alone.

Netanyahu should have been attacked mercilessly for this worldview, before anything else, including his lifestyle. It is what sows the seeds of the country's destruction, long before the Wing of Zion plane, his son Yair, his wife Sara and the corruption trials.
The endless renovation of the house in Caesarea is abhorrent, as is the treatment of employees of the prime minister's residence, but Netanyahu's plan to perpetuate apartheid is the greatest danger posed by the most reviled/revered prime minister in Israeli history.

For this, for the immortalization of apartheid, no leader of a Zionist party can attack Netanyahu: from Itamar Ben-Gvir to Yair Golan, they all agree with him. And that is the true cause for despair, it is the greatest of all reasons for hopelessness.

Source : Haaretz

Link : https://archive.md/OjBFw

[soandso]

196. Thank you for this, Israeli

I've just read what you posted here but will go to the link and read all of it.

This confirms my impressions from reading Israeli news sites, as well as the comments on the articles. It is NOT just Netanyahu who is the problem, it is policy or ideology and many are in agreement with Netanyahu's goals - including, I'm sure, some families of the hostages. In fact, I would venture a guess that there are hostage families who have hardened their opinions due to what's happened, which is understandable. A lot of fear has been created because of Oct 7.

It is always a mistake, imo, to get overly focused on a personality - even a detestable one like Netanyahu. It's policy and goals that matter and the situation in Israel is so complex and not easily solved. The borders are a mess and even a two state solution won't be cut and dried. How can a Palestinian state not be contiguous? It seems to me that borders need to be completely redrawn.

[drmeow]

62. At the very least

we should bring our support of Israel more in line with our support of other countries. Since WWII we've given more aid to Israel than any other country. We cover 15% of Israel's defense budget.

[soandso]

68. Bring them in line, how?

Force a cease fire or withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza and/or the West Bank?

[drmeow]

103. When one says, with regard to monetary aid

"bring in line with other countries" it means make the amounts closer to the amounts we give other countries. In other words, at the very least we should reduce the amount of aid we give to Israel given that we have given them more than we have given to any other country.

[soandso]

106. Oh, okay

I misunderstood about what you meant. So, it's not so much what they do with the aid but the dollar amount?

[drmeow]

116. At the very least.

In other words, no matter what they do with it, we give them too much. There is no other country that has gotten as much US aid as Israel and there is no other country that has gotten as much military aid as Israel. Since 1948 Israel has received almost double the amount of US aid of the next highest US aid recipient (keep in mind Israel didn't even exist in 1948). So, bottom line, we give them too much money, period, full stop, end of subject.

[soandso]

122. There's another poster on this thread

who has said that the US does it because it's buying intelligence that only Israel can provide. What do you think about that? Personally, and while I found that to be a logical explanation as to the real truth of the matter, I look at the US Debt Clock and think that's the most important consideration. The US is borrowing money and paying interest on it, to provide foreign aid.

[drmeow]

125. That's a slippery slope

and something of a RW talking point. Foreign aid is a drop in the federal budget - and there are benefits to providing aid (all wealthy countries give aid - some of the road development I was seeing in Belize was funded by Saudi Arabia!).

As for buying intelligence - sounds like an after the fact justification to me. There is no way Israel gives us double the valuable intelligence that other countries we give aid to furnish. And can purchased intelligence be fully trusted? The doesn't negate the need for our own intelligence gathering. Furthermore, there are laws about having to balance the amount of middle eastern aid in Israel's favor - that's not an intelligence thing. Does not pass the smell test at all.

[soandso]

128. Well, that's the first time I'd heard that

and it sounded legit, to me. Israel certainly does appear to have moles all over the middle east and Iran based on the assassinations and sabotage they've done in other countries. How else would they get the exact guest room where that Hamas guy just got blown to smithereens? Same for assassinations inside Iran. Either Israel has agents in those countries or Israelis are coming and going without getting caught.

[Babywhale]

64. Whether We Like It Or Not.......

Whether We Like It Or Not Israel is a US proxy. They are there to serve US foreign policy interests.Discussions about whether or not to fund them or killing of Palestinians is moot.The policy is there and is playing out regardless of your opinions.Whatever "news" you read is disinformation or propaganda to keep you confused,to keep you in line and to prevent any honest debate.

[soandso]

67. If you think Israel is a proxy

then who or what are they being used against?

[Babywhale]

72. They Are The Keystone........

They Are The Keystone to US foreign policy and power in the middle east. They are being used against what is perceived as any potential threat to US economic or military power in the region. The enemy du jour changes as power shifts and the need to control domestic opinion evolves.

[Happyhippychick]

65. I find it ironic that democrats would question whether they should fund the only democracy in that region

Of course we should fund, we have no choice.

[soandso]

71. I don't think a majority of Democrats

would disagree with you. A subset would make it conditional on getting rid of Netanyahu but would resume support upon his leaving office. That's just my impression, anyway.

[Happyhippychick]

118. I can definitely agree with getting rid of bibi but I don't know how that would happen.

I hate that guy.

[soandso]

121. Same

I think he's a psychopath but what he's doing is supported by a lot of Israelis and I'm not sure that another PM would do something like withdraw Israeli forces after all of the effort to get where they are.

[yagotme]

240. The only way, really, to get rid of him, is...

democratically.

[Autumn]

66. Yes. We should stop funding Israel until they get rid of Netanyahu.

[soandso]

69. And then what?

Do you think a new Israeli administration would withdraw from Gaza for the return of the hostages?

[Autumn]

73. I was very clear with what I said. We should not fund Israel until they get

rid of Netanyahu. They want to keep him and his policies in power then they should be on their own.

[soandso]

75. Yeah, I get that

but I'm as certain as you appear to be that their current policy would change that much under a new PM. I base that only comments I read in the Israeli papers/websites. What I mean is that lots of Israelis are fed up with Netanyahu but that doesn't mean they want Hamas to continue in Gaza. How they get rid of Hamas (nearly impossible) without continuing the war, I have no clue.

[Autumn]

83. Netanyahu has kept Hamas in power because Hamas and he share a goal. Making sure that

there will not be a two state solution and Israel will be able to continue to take Palestinian land. One piece at a time.

[soandso]

153. Bingo

Both Netanyahu and Hamas oppose a two state solution to they're on the same page on that.

[anamnua]

70. Yes NT

[Arazi]

74. Our $$ is actually buying services from Israel

Israel is our spymaster in the ME.

We pay the big bucks for that service.

You can quibble over the price but there isn’t any other entity with their capabilities (I do recognize Jordan’s considerable efforts on our behalf as well but nothing matches Israel).

The US will never stop funding Israel. The question is silly and reflects a very poor understanding of geopolitical realities

[soandso]

87. Most interesting answer yet

If I may, I'd like to dig into this. Do you think all of the talk about Israel being the only democracy in middle east is just smokescreen and that if If Israel were a totalitarian state that provided the US with valuable intel that the relationship would still be the same?

[Arazi]

99. Yes because we have the same relationship with Jordan

Which is a monarchy.

Israel now has moles/spies that have “passed” as Saudis, Qataris, Egyptians etc. Their inroads into the highest levels of ME authoritarian regimes is unparalleled.

Only Jordan comes close and that’s because Abdullah (and his wife) are US allies and pass along info they get first hand.

I guarantee you Israel is as important as our Five Eyes partners (and Russia would pay double what we pay for Israeli intel if Israel would ever consider it)

[soandso]

102. Thank you for that well reasoned answer

and I agree. There are "reasons" given to the masses (who also have their own reasons) and there is the real reason. I much prefer the truth and to to dispense with the bullshit.

Do you think the Islamic countries necessitate the type of intelligence that Israel is being payed for? IOW, do they pose that dire of a threat to US (corporate) interests?

[Arazi]

112. Yes. The oil countries (OPEC) especially are of critical importance

To us personally and to global stability.

Israel IS the only democracy in the ME and it is worthy of support for that reason too…

But having spies “in the room where it happens” in virtually every ME country is priceless. Plus Israel has developed incredible GEOINT, SIGINT and data collection that is unmatched right now along with their HUMINT assets. Worth every penny (until we finally shed our reliance on oil?) - Stuxnet was just a fraction of Israel’s capabilities

[soandso]

120. Hmmm

I need to ponder this more than give an unthoughtful reply. I'm not down with the whole American Hegemon thing (too Project for a New American Century for me), though I do recognize the value, to a degree.

Let me ask you this: With respect to what's happening in Gaza, specifically so many innocents killed and so much of the strip destroyed, do you think there's a point in human lives and property that is too much to be paid in terms of the US-Israel relationship? The US has referred to a "red line" but, of course, will never define what that is. Is there a red line or is what the US gets out of the relationship more valuable than any of the results of conflicts that Israel is involved in (over there)?

[Arazi]

124. The US has the bloodiest hands of them all

I doubt there’s any real “red line”.

We are in no moral position to dictate morality when it comes to outsized overreactions to terrorism on a country’s soil.

If Israel somehow matches the millions of Iraqis that we needlessly slaughtered (to name just one conflict), then maybe we’d offer up some mild (financial) rebuke.

Maybe.

I mean, we’ve all just watched a million+ Sudanese be genocided with nary a qualm… we actually are a ruthless and brutal country inured to the atrocities of war (and the I/P war is just another war like any other, no different). Even here on DU these other (far worse) conflicts don’t even merit 15 minutes of attention.

DU has had many thoughtful discussions of America’s post-WWII role in this current world order. I’m not interested in a rehash tbh. As it stands we are the #1 global empire and whatever you think of it doesn’t change that fact one iota. Climate change will only harden that reality… if you think PNAC was a horror, our policies are on the brink of getting far far more draconian.

[soandso]

133. We're in agreement on the bloody hands

Would you say that the US needs that Israeli intelligence because of the US' own actions that have created so many potential enemies?

I'm curious about your last sentence in reference to PNAC.

[Arazi]

169. We're actually "friends" (sic) with OPEC countries

We pay Egypt billions every year do they won’t bomb the shit out of their neighbor Israel so technically they’re our “friend” too.

Iran is our biggest enemy in the region. Theoretically even Iraq is neutral towards us.

Do you trust any of them? Or do you think it’s all kumbaya if we’re not in active conflict? We shouldn’t keep apprised of their machinations (if possible)? Do you think oil production is of importance to the global economy and that the US might want to know the secret dealings of OPEC?

[soandso]

197. I don't think "trust"

is a word that has any place in geopolitics. You have agreements with other players until you don't. Treaties don't even mean much.

[OAITW r.2.0]

76. Lets discuss in January and focus on getting Kamala Harris elected.

There will be some heavy anii-Bibi focus after we win.

[atreides1]

77. Should the US stop funding Israel?

HELL YES!!!

[former9thward]

78. No.

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and the only U.S. true ally in that region. The Arab states flip back and forth between the U.S. and Russia based on money at the time.

[soandso]

96. Ally in what way

and against whom?

[former9thward]

101. Against terrorist groups and countries.

Maybe you don't consider Hamas and Hezbollah to be terrorists, but the U.S. does. As well as terrorist Iran.

[soandso]

104. Why would you think I wouldn't

see those organizations and the Iranian regime as terrorists? I do. How much of a threat they pose to the US is another matter.

[former9thward]

107. Those organizations and Iran have been killing Americans in the region for generations.

Maybe that is why the U.S. considers them to be a threat.

[soandso]

111. When and where?

I know about US service personnel killed in Lebanon but that was pre Hezbollah, right? I'm not aware of Hamas attacking Americans unless you mean Israelis who are also American (currently some hostages). Iran would be due to US involvement in Iraq and Syria, correct?

[walkingman]

79. I think conditional funding is legitimate foreign policy.

[soandso]

95. The recipients may not agree

Do you think the US should, for instance, make the calls on Israel's wars with Hamas, Hezbollah, etc?

[soandso]

94. Happy to answer

No, this is not a troll and I'm curious why you would think that. I see it as a huge foreign policy question that's bordering on explosive. It's certainly a political minefield. How many threads have we had on Israel-Palestine? A lot. So I'm simply asking outright what people want. So far, I see the majority support continuing support with a subset who want Netanyahu gone but then resume support and a minority wanting to end it.

[GP6971]

97. Let's see...new member of just under 2 months with

206 posts and 2 hides. Not normal for a new member. So yes...I suspect you are a troll.

[megahertz]

108. Off topic but what are "hides" and how can you tell

when someone is doing it? Semi-newbie here, a little confused.

[GP6971]

119. A hide means that a post was removed for violating certain conditions. Once a member reaches 5 hidden posts in 90

days they are Flagged for Review and can no longer post.

[megahertz]

127. Oh okay, thank you. n/t

[soandso]

156. Re: the hides

or deleted posts: I don't recall what the first one was but the second was yesterday. I made a comment about animal rights and abuse and was informed it was a "right wing talking point". I don't see that issue as political but won't bring it up again.

[megahertz]

188. I wouldn't think animal rights or abuse would be a right-wing talking point. Odd. n/t

[soandso]

155. I'm sorry you believe that

and I hate trolls. This was very sincere question in my OP and it's an important topic, imo.

[vapor2]

85. Your question/statement is well worded

and I do think we should stop funding Israel

[soandso]

90. Well, thank you

It seems that still some misunderstood it as being about Oct 7, Netanyahu, Hamas, etc., and it's not.

[sellitman]

86. A big fat

NO!!!!!!

[soandso]

89. lol

I will mark that down as a NO!!!!! in red bold letters. You should note that you are in the majority as far is this thread goes.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

88. No

[Pinback]

91. Let's you and them fight!

Another flaming bag of dog poop on DU’s doorstep. Trashing thread.

Edit:
Welcome to DU! Having fun so far?

[Bev54]

93. This is a very difficult and nuanced question that absolutely cannot be answered by

everyday people on the street. Nobody here knows what the government knows. There are defense agreements signed that cannot just be broken (unless you are Trump). This question should not be asked as if it is a yes or no answer.

[DSandra]

98. No but with strings attached

The big one is to leave the Palestinians alone, let them have land to themselves (including the entire West Bank), and cooperate with a two state solution. Palestinians shouldn't be punished with their land being taken away. At the same time, the U.S. should give money to Palestinians to rebuild their societies and prosper, and that will kill Hamas.

[B.See]

105. I like this answer, and I agree.

Israel is our ally but the US should back a two state solution, a lasting peace, and the rebuilding of Palestine.

[soandso]

109. I think the US does

give money to the Palestinians, though I don't know anything about it. From what I gather, money from outside for Palestinians goes through Israel. Once it gets to Gaza (don't know about the West Bank), Hamas steals the lion's share of it.

[moniss]

123. It might be of note that their economy typically ranks

in the top 20-30 in the world as far as GDP. It moves up and down as do many once you get down from the top half a dozen or so. Of course beyond defense assistance there are other concerns people raise about funding and investment in Israel. One of those is the cybersecurity industry and defense technology industries. People are concerned about actions regarding Russia and others that may be counter to US interests. There are also concerns about Israel providing military support to repressive regimes like Myanmar etc. To what degree our support is in "normal" times versus now it is obviously quite different. I would say that if things became more "historically" normal it would be an easier consideration politically to cut back on US government assistance. But I don't know if we are going to see some semblance of "normal" or "typical" any time soon.

[soandso]

147. Israel's debt to GDP is better than the US

If history is any indicator, war and killing seem to the norm in this realm of existence.

[Johnny2X2X]

129. What does the US get out of funding them?

Are we more secure? No.

And their current elected leader is trying to help overthrow our democracy. BiBi likes Putin more than US Democracy.

[soandso]

145. Read the posts in this thread from Arazi

they contend (and I found it quite plausible) that what the US gets is valuable intelligence. IOW, it's less giving them aid and more about paying them for intel.

[moniss]

158. It's called

"playing both ends against the middle".

[Mysterian]

131. Cut it in half

Israel has nukes.

[soandso]

143. Yes they do

and I hope they never use them.

Cutting the aid in half would probably make one group happy and piss off the other.

[sarisataka]

146. That sounds like a suggestion Israel use their nukes

rather than rely on US support

[Mysterian]

149. It means Israel will never be invaded by a conventional army

which means Israel has a certain level of security.

Israel is not the 51st state. But they have universal health care, something we don't have in the USA. Maybe we can start investing more in the USA. Israel can defend itself.

[sarisataka]

152. Unfortunately, the threats Israel primarily faces are unconventional,

the surrounding nations realized after half a dozen defeats, they cannot destroy Israel on the battlefield.

It seems conditioning our support of an ally on our healthcare system is a non sequitur.

[Mysterian]

178. Every U.S. expenditure should be conditioned on what is best for the American people,

not the people of Israel. I support aid to Israel but I think it's time to cut it back.

[sarisataka]

182. Should the US do an end to end review

of the $70 billion+ foreign aid we distribute and judge it by what is best for the American people? Or is it only Israel that should face such scrutiny? How far should they get cut back?

[Mysterian]

183. My previous post read:

"Every U.S. expenditure should be conditioned on what is best for the American people..."

Maybe you missed that part.

[sarisataka]

186. Just checking...

One could ask if the money we give to Ukraine and Ethiopia could be better used to benefit the American people. Those countries together receive 5x what we give to Israel. Maybe there are places we could cut back on support for them as well?

[Mysterian]

190. Israel has been the largest recipient of U.S. military aid since WWII

I'm not sure where you're getting your info from.

[sarisataka]

191. I didn't realize we were only discussing military aid

And looking at cumulative expenditures.

I was looking at 2022 US foreign aid. Israel received about 3 billion dollars out of seventy billion the US gave out. Ukraine received twelve billion and Ethiopia over two billion. The number included both humanitarian and military aid.

That's quite a bit of money that could have benefited the American people. We should be reviewing all of it if we are not singling out one country.

[PufPuf23]

194. Israel received $4.8 billion in military aid in 2022 not $ 3 billion.

Here is link to the Jewish Virtual Library.

U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel: Total Aid
(1949 - Present)

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/total-u-s-foreign-aid-to-israel-1949-present

[Mysterian]

211. Aid should be based on what is best for the American people

Ukraine is in a battle of survival against the arch-enemy of Western Europe and the USA. If Ukraine falls, all of Western Europe is under threat. Helping Ukraine is more important to the security of the USA than helping Israel.

Israel is dealing with terroristic, hostile neighbors but not in a fight for survival. They certainly deserve our help but not to the extent that Ukraine needs it.

[gopiscrap]

134. absolutely stop funding Israel

[FoxNewsSucks]

137. Yes. Unless they get rid of Netnyehoo

Nothing until then.

[soandso]

148. I don't understand why they don't

Don't they have a system where they can call for a no confidence vote and kick his ass out? I haven't seen polling of Israelis but it seem like most there can't stand him.

[Israeli]

165. Not an easy thing to achieve during a war

its been tried ,
see :
https://www.timesofisrael.com/no-confidence-motion-against-netanyahu-fails-in-knesset-with-only-18-votes-in-favor/

I wouldnt say we are most but we are many ......how many only the next elections will tell .

As for polls .....read this and weep :

https://archive.md/yoq7M

[soandso]

198. Very interesting

I think it's the old adage about not changing horses in the middle of the stream. Nobody seems to know what to do. I'm also surprised at how much people approve of assassinations but then I'm not a hawk and I don't live in Israel. It's quite clear to me now how a no confidence vote - even if held every week - is going nowhere.

[BrianTheEVGuy]

144. Nope

The thing that people don’t understand about US funding for Israeli defense is that it has a moderating effect on the conflict.

If Israel has to go it alone, it’s only a matter of time before the conflict goes nuclear.

[soandso]

157. I'll admit

that that has never crossed my mind. I don't think that possibility has any bearing on why the US funds Israel.

[BrianTheEVGuy]

159. It does

Without the USA, the extensive use of nuclear weapons makes sense to destroy jihadists.

[soandso]

163. I don't think that makes sense!

That's crazy. Nevertheless, would Israel do it? I don't know. They certainly couldn't nuke (can't believe I'm saying that word) Gaza. Iran is another matter but it would lead to some kind of nightmare I don't even want to ponder. Surely they understand that? Then again, they have floated the "Samson option" which is basically destroy everything and everyone if they don't get their way. However, every country has it's war mongering crazies who say that kind of shit. John McCain and Lindsay Graham come to mind in the US.

[BrianTheEVGuy]

164. Jewish people will never be mass murdered again

If the West will not prevent another massacre, we will do what’s necessary to protect ourselves, including nuclear weapons if it comes to that.

Because the enemies of Israel have been very clear that their goal is the eradication of all Jews, a response in kind is not out of the question — should it come to that.

[soandso]

199. Who would you have Israel nuke?

And who do you think wants to "kill all Jewish people"? For the record, I think that kind of talk is over the top insane (or political rhetoric) but since you feel that way, I'd like you to elaborate I don't like that you or anyone feels that way. It's not good for you or anyone else.

[BrianTheEVGuy]

207. Read the founding documents for Fatah, the PLO, Hamas and Hizbollah

All of them explicitly call for the extermination of all Jews worldwide.

[soandso]

208. Got a link?

I must say I find that hard to believe and I'm not sympathetic to any of those groups you mentioned. I would expect their objection would be more to "the Zionist entity", a Jewish state or something like that, rather than all Jews, all over the world.

Anyway, so you would have Israel nuke whom, exactly and where? Thank about that. I mean let's say it's Hamas you want to nuke. How you gonna do that w/o nuking all of the innocent people, not to mention Gaza is right next door to Israel!

[BrianTheEVGuy]

209. The information is easy enough to find with your preferred search engine

And common knowledge for those with knowledge of the conflict.

For example, this is literally the first result in a Google search:

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/10/hamas-covenant-israel-attack-war-genocide/675602/

[soandso]

212. I found the 2017 Hamas Charter

Have not read it, yet, but will. I don't want to sign up for the Atlantic.

https://mondoweiss.net/2017/04/translated-leaked-charter/

Now, what about my nuke question? I'm pressing this because I have seen online, over the years, lots of people calling for nuking someone (usually Iran) with comments like "turn it into glass" and I honestly don't think people are really what they are saying with such cavalier statements.

[BrianTheEVGuy]

214. Read the FOUNDING charters

That tells you the original intent of the organization.

As for nuclear weapons, if I was Israeli PM, I’d change policies.

I would announce that Israel is a nuclear state and that it will launch a nuclear strike on any site that launches rockets at Israel. That would work to pressure Lebanese authorities to expel Hizbollah from their territory.

I’d also state that Hizbollah is an Iranian proxy and that any rocket attacks from Hizbollah will result in retaliation against Iran directly — specifically, the destruction of the Kargh Island oil terminal and refinery that is the heart of the Iranian oil industry.

Without that refinery, Iran’s economy would collapse and it would be unable to fund its terror proxies like Hizbollah.

[soandso]

215. I decided to read the revised charter

because it's their position now.

Okay, so you'd nuke Hezbollah, in Lebanon, the next time they launch a rocket at Israel. What do you think the result of that would be?

[BrianTheEVGuy]

216. By your logic...

… the KKK is no big deal because they revised their charter this year.

[soandso]

217. If you can provide

the relevant section of the original that you want to me read, I'm happy to do so. It's just that a charter is an official statement and if it's revised, the most current version is what's relevant right now. I understand that you want me to read the worse version and I don't doubt the older one is is worse. A revised charter doesn't change my mind about Hamas being a criminal and murderous organization, though. They are.

[BrianTheEVGuy]

219. Again, that's just ignoring the history

You should be doing some independent research on this.

[TheKentuckian]

242. The whole point being made to you is that the poster doesn't want anyone nuked.

Why are you asking them who they would have Israel nuke?

All nuclear powers essentially have the "Sampson Option", that is why they are possessed.

How many thousands of times must we and Russia be able to obliterate the entire globe for any other purpose?

Nobody is using them for simply "not getting their way", or they would be in use all the time so that is blatant nonsense.
Not even the rogues gallery (saber rattling aside) but if the threat rises to existential by definition it is that level of threat to every living thing on Earth too once certain volume and delivery thresholds are reached.

The cost of achieving certain ends is almost sure to cost far more than is gained even in the most optimistic fantasy of the true believer.

[soandso]

256. The poster said Hamas wants to kill all Jews

world wide and followed with Israel would use nukes if necessary. I was just responding to that talk of nukes, which I think is crazy. Asking who and where is going to get nuked is to provoke a more complete thought which would, I hope, lead to the conclusion that's nonsensical to suggest such a thing.

[larwdem]

151. fuck no

[FlyingPiggy]

154. This is a wedge issue. Can we JUST focus on the election right now,

Discussing this now, does nothing but tear us apart. And wouldn’t so many forces out there love that. No thanks. I’m staying FOCUSED on the election.

[iemanja]

161. It should quit arming Israel

but could provide funds for other purposes.

[betsuni]

167. That's for foreign policy experts to decide, not the "feelings" of misinformed random people.

Last edited Mon Aug 26, 2024, 06:29 AM - Edit history (1)

Idiots make extremely complicated problems like I/P war seem like there are easy simple solutions that are Democrats' fault and make easy simple problems like chose between Democrats and Republicans into some kind of morally complicated problem. Ridiculous.

[akbacchus_BC]

168. YES. The US should have stopped ages ago when Israel started taking away Palestinians lands. It is

so unfair that one country has rights and the other is at the mercy of Israel and the powers that be. 40,000 Palestinians being slaughtered is mind boggling. Israel's plan is to kill all Palestinians so that its settlements can continue in Gaza. The world sits by including the UN, ignoring the atrocities against the Palestinians to continue. It is sickening to see what is happening in Palestine. It is genocide in full display.

[EX500rider]

249. " Israel's plan is to kill all Palestinians so that its settlements can continue in Gaza. "

Very slow moving plan...

2,142,000 Gazans
40,000+- dead if you believe Hamas of which more then 15,000 were Hamas sounds like Israel does not have a plan to "kill all Gazan's" or the numbers would be 10x higher at least, not under 2% after almost year. So 50 more years might get it done?
In a mostly urban setting fighting mostly un-uniformed combatants who hide amoung civilians the IDF is doing a better job then any other military would with those constraints.

[Beringia]

170. Thanks for addressing this head on

[krawhitham]

177. Yes

[Deep State Witch]

189. Yes And No

"Funding Israel" is a broad brush. Should we be giving them bombs and bullets to kill people in Gaza? No. Should we be giving them non-lethal military assistance, such as intelligence or training, yes.

[dsp3000]

193. Yes, or at least hold them accountable for their illegal settlements in the west bank

and poor treatment of palestinians.

[Oopsie Daisy]

195. Oy vey! 🙄 Here we go again! Let's "stop funding for Israel"... because Hamas is the ONLY threat to Israel? Please.

Israel is not the aggressor. Israel doesn't want innocent civilian casualties and deaths... HAMAS WANTS IT!! 1) Because they are cowards, and 2) because they value dead/injured civilians more as PROPAGANDA.

Hamas knows that outlets like the Democratic-party hating "Democracy Not!" are absolutely drooling and damn-near orgasmic when it comes to giving breathless nonstop coverage of every manufactured opportunity to smear the Democrats, our Democratic candidates and the Biden Administration.

The fact is, and will always remain that if Hamas genuinely cared about civilians or other non-Hamas individuals... then Hamas would cease hiding among civilians. They would stop stockpiling weapons, or having operation centers in/around/under places like hospitals, schools, refugee centers, markets, etc.

But, instead they CONTINUE to do all the things that put non-combatants in harm's way. Why? (I ask rhetorically... I think we all know the reasons why.)

[soandso]

204. I agree w/you 100% about Hamas

So please don't put words in my mouth like, "Let's "stop funding for Israel". I did not say that and I see this as a very complicated and nuanced situation, without easy answers. Because it comes up over and over over, I wanted to ask the question directly as to where people stand and it seems to be a clear no on stopping funding but there is strong feeling in the other camp, as well. I also don't see this as some kind of Democratic party issue - far from it! There is and always been strong bi-partisan support for (funding) Israel and probably more so with Rs because of the bible thumpers/evangelicals. There's also a domestic economic angle in this in that aid to Israel requires a percentage be spent on American made weapons so it's a subsidy to the US MIC which provides American jobs.

[Oopsie Daisy]

210. Good to know.

[RandySF]

201. No

[pansypoo53219]

228. needs conditions. mainly the end of settlements. netanfuckyou has to resign. and 2 states.

[Emile]

238. As long as we don't have National Healthcare, I say

yes on stop funding Israel.

[TheKentuckian]

244. Our not having national health care has absolutely nothing to do with Israel.

In fact, our entire foreign aid portfolio makes not a bit of difference in this regard nor is it a lever for the bulk of the opposition to such.

I don't understand the condition. No aid to countries with sane health systems?

Would.you have us exit NATO as well?

[Emile]

246. But, Israel has National Healthcare.

Last edited Mon Sep 2, 2024, 02:39 PM - Edit history (1)

If they can afford universal Healthcare and we can't, maybe they need to be sending us funding?

[mvd]

250. I think Israel still needs funding

The Middle East has more threats than just Hamas, and bigger threats. I do think we should put some conditions on what we fund. Especially with the RW government Israel has.

[sboatcar]

251. As long as Netanyahu is in charge, yes.

His actions have been the greatest source of new antisemitism all over the world.

[Joinfortmill]

252. Well, the question has a lot of constraints to it.

So, I guess I would say, Israel is an ally. We support our allies.

[SamuelTheThird]

255. Well, no matter your position, consider this

If Israel can't defend itself conventionally, you'll see nukes used.

Do you really want to pull all funding, which includes defensive?

[soandso]

257. I don't pretend to have the answers

Off the top of my head, I would not withdraw support for the iron dome, which is purely defensive. Beyond that, though, is another matter. Hamas is not going to cease what it is they're doing unless Israel ceases what it is they're doing and I don't think it benefits the US to be involved in this decades old conflict. Neither side is going to budge.

[Swede]

260. No.

Israel is an ally. Netanyahoo is not (he should be in prison).

[anamnua]

261. Yes NT

[Chakaconcarne]

262. Absofuckinlutely

They have the re$ource$.

The MIC would probably disagree, however.

[EnergizedLib]

267. Absolutely

To me, Israel is the parasite and America is the host.

America owes Israel nothing.

[sarisataka]

268. Jewish parasite

Jewish parasite

The "Jewish parasite" is a notion that dates back to the Age of Enlightenment.[citation needed] It is based on the notion that the Jews of the diaspora are incapable of forming their own states and would therefore parasitically attack and exploit states and peoples, which are biologically imagined as organisms or "peoples bodies". The stereotype is often associated with the accusation of usury and the separation of "creative", i.e. productive, and "raffling", non-productive financial capital ("High Finance&quot .

***

The earliest evidence of the idea of a "Jewish parasite" can be found in the 18th century. Precursors could be found, as suspected by the German-Israeli historian Alexander Bein, in the medieval notion of the "usurious Jew" who would suck the blood out of the people and the ritual murder legend according to which Jews would use the blood of Christian children for ritual purposes. In addition - for instance in Martin Luther's anti-Jewish writings - the idea can be proven that Jews are only guests in Europe, that Christians are their hosts, from which later the idea of the host people afflicted by parasites developed.[1] The French Enlightenment philosopher Voltaire (1694-1778) explicitly denied the Jews the ability to achieve their own cultural achievements and to achieve lasting statehood: as evidence he cited the construction of the first temple, for which Solomon with Hiram of Tyre had had to engage craftsmen from Lebanon, and the double exile (first the Babylonian Exile after 597 BC and then the Diaspora after the expulsion by the Romans in 135 AD). The entire Torah would have been parasitically borrowed from ancient Oriental sources.[2][3]

***

The stereotype of the Jewish parasite can also be traced in antisemitism after 1945. In 1947 the Berliner Illustrierte interpreted the abbreviation "D.P.". (Displaced Persons, meaning people liberated from concentration camps and forced labour camps) as "Deutschlands Parasiten" (Germany's parasites).[49]

A linguistic analysis of letters to the Central Council of Jews in Germany and the Israeli Embassy in Berlin from 2002 to 2012 showed the unbroken liveliness of the stereotype of the Jewish parasite in the present[50] Among neo-Nazis, these metaphors are widely used to describe Jews and foreigners. According to Bernhard Pörksen, such animal metaphors serve the attempt to "create disgust and lower inhibitions of Extermination"[51] According to the 2007 analysis by Albert Scherr and Barbara Schäuble, the antisemitic "topos of parasites, impurities and blood", to which the stereotype "Jewish parasite" can be attributed, is also taken up in media discourses as well as by contemporary young people in narratives and argumentations.[52]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_parasite

I hope this educates you and you were unaware of the history

[EnergizedLib]

269. Yes, I was unaware of this history

I see the Israeli government as Zionist, corrupt, which leeches off America and should be sent to The Hague.

I’m against Israel’s apartheid policies, not Jewish people.