US is unlikely to stop giving military aid to Israel − because it benefits from it
theconversation.com
The US has given military aid to Israel since the 1960s, backed by both domestic and regional strategic interests, including containing Iran.
  • Melkath@kbin.earth
    46·
    26 days ago

    Correction.

    The US does not benefit from it. The increasingly fascist and plutocratic ruling class benefits from it.

    We, the tax payers, are the ones being robbed.

    The money goes from our pockets, gets laundered through Israel. The Israelies bribe our politicians with it, then enrich the military contractors with what’s left.

    Palestinians get slaughtered. Tax payers get bled like stuck pigs. The police become more militarized. The party distinction lessens. Then, when Gaza has been successfully ethnically cleansed, a “completely unforeseen terrorist attack” (that was totally not committed by the Pentagon) will happen in America, and Iran will be blamed.

    A major population of the children of dutiful bootlickers between the ages 18 and 23 will go off to war and ravage Iran, Syria, Lebanon… the entire Middle East, taking their direct orders from the IDF. Israel will expand and will continue to thrive as the luxury epicenter for the uber-rich and powerful, protected by the Iron Dome surrounded with American youth and warships.

    At the same time, American Palestinians will be identified as domestic terrorists, along with anyone who spoke up in Palestine’s defense. They will be round up, pushed out of major population centers, and will face the same treatment Gaza got. Not only will there be the taxes>Israel>politician payoff>weapons pay-loop, but the taxes>Pentagon>politician payoff>weapons pay-loop will be fired back up full force.

    Then on to the next race whose country of genetic origin gives America/Israel any reason.

    It is all SO painfully see-through and boring.

    It is all that happens over and over and over again. For the entire span of human history.

    • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
      3·
      24 days ago

      I don’t disagree but there is a huge military advantage to having Israel as an ally in the Middle East. Now more than ever with Iran and Afghanistan being increasingly extremist as of late.

          • Melkath@kbin.earth
            1·
            24 days ago

            About the stupid and dismissive response I would expect from a lead eating knuckle dragging fascist.

            You know why Iran and Afganistan are increasingly extremist as of late? Because Israel is fucking colonizing and bombing their lands, you cretin.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        1·
        24 days ago

        Like what? Seriously, the US has bases out the ass in the middle east. Losing Israel is not a big deal. And when was the last time they actually helped in a war? In the gulf war they were a fuckin liability because Iraq attacked them to try to get them to join the war and get the Muslim countries to pull out of the coalition.

    • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
      8·
      26 days ago

      Read the assessment. Obviouly, leaving the middle east to Russia and Iran is not in the US best interest.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        15·
        26 days ago

        Then stop working with Israel and work with Iran. Come to the table with Iran and shift the conversation. Leave Netanyahu out of the conversation for one round of talks and Netanyahu is done politically, forever. You’ve got an actual moderate in Iran to work with. Do so and simultaneously gain ground on both Israel and Russia.

        You realize how naive the take in this piece is right?

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            9·
            26 days ago

            Exactly. They have shown a willingness to come to the table in good faith.

            The entire goal here is to use your leverage. The US has all of the leverage in these negotiations and has simply refused to use it.

            • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
              10·
              26 days ago

              The US negotiated a 5 state treaty that worked. No, the US didn’t have all the leverage but achieved it anyway. Then Trump tore it up. Think Iran would back an agreement with the US again? Far as I know, there is still talking

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            24 days ago

            So, what has Biden done to restore it?

            If your answer includes the phrase “behind the scenes,” lie to someone else.

            • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
              1·
              24 days ago

              Biden sent Blinkin to talk with the Iranians. Because of the years of uranium enrichment by Iran since Trump destroyed the agreement, the breakout times of the original agreement could not be achieved talks collapsed. Should be a lot of news reports you could google.

        • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
          2·
          26 days ago

          We did that, then the evangelical assholes had the Republicans undermine our efforts that Obama spearheaded.

          Until Republicans are marginalized and a minority party for quite a while, you won’t see any progress.

    • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      8·
      26 days ago

      Not the average middle class/ low-income voter Harris needs to get elected.

      The quiet part most people don’t want to face is that she (or any other Democrat) doesn’t need voters at all. When they’ve always got the dubious advantage of being “the lesser evil”, what voters really want or would benefit from doesn’t matter, as long as it’s not as bad as the other guy. Those already in power will continue to reap the benefits of the system whoever the figurehead at the top is, it’s designed that way.

  • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
    16·
    26 days ago

    No shit sherlock. Genocide is a US government thing, it doesn’t matter which president or administration.

    Eisenhower 1961:

    “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

    What if I told you, you don’t become president if you aren’t willing to feed the war machine?

    On the flip side, you won’t have the power to enact change if you don’t become president. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

  • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
    11·
    26 days ago

    That’s the problem.

    A literal ocean of blood isn’t enough to make them second guess the imperialism. Isn’t even a consideration.

    Just send the dual citizen Israeli sabatour to go make sure no deal is reached.

    Periodic reminder, Bush’s War on Peace killed 4,800,000 people. Human beings. Dead. We are not the good guys.

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    5·
    24 days ago

    This article is a good example of manufacturing consent. The U.S., even the industrial pipelines, don’t benefit from war as an industry. Short term gains are not the same as long term benefits.

    Second, regional destabilization just makes a less safe world, and holds back societal and intellectual progress. We continue to live like primal idiots as a result of all of this.

    Let’s also not forget the cultural, moral and philosophical losses. If you continue to uphold legacies of bloodlust, you cannot have a moral or ethical ground to stand on when an enemy does worse.