Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
hooman
Oct 11, 2007

This guy seems legit.
Fun Shoe

Bar Ran Dun posted:

They could have stalled with words. That’s a lot cheaper and far less risky than doing this.

Bar Ran Dun posted:

They should have started on it sooner. January or February instead of March.

What do you think the US was doing between October and March?

Pressure was increasing because of the stalling with words and so they have changed to a more expensive and risky stalling tactic.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

slorb
May 14, 2002
The only benefit the pier does seem to have it is it makes it harder for settlers to camp out in front of the trucks while the IDF pretends they're trying to move them on.

But I bet they'll just manufacture a "Hamas mortar/rocket attack" on the pier every few days so that it is usually shut.

moths
Aug 25, 2004

I would also still appreciate some danger.



DeadlyMuffin posted:

If the Houthis shoot at ships carrying aid they should be condemned. But given that they haven't, and nobody is making the claim that they are, you're making up something to be mad about when there are plenty of real things.

Nobody said that they did or would.

This absurd pier offers a slew of new, barely-plausible excuses for why aid can't get to Gaza.

Its primary role is dampening the optics of Israel's starvation campaign.

hadji murad
Apr 18, 2006

slorb posted:

The only benefit the pier does seem to have it is it makes it harder for settlers to camp out in front of the trucks while the IDF pretends they're trying to move them on.

But I bet they'll just manufacture a "Hamas mortar/rocket attack" on the pier every few days so that it is usually shut.

They could’ve saved a lot of money by just building a bitchin’ ramp on the Egyptian side of the border.

Paladinus
Jan 11, 2014

heyHEYYYY!!!
Is there a breakdown somewhere that details how the $26 billion from the recent bill meant 'for Israel and for humanitarian aid in Gaza and other places' will be spent? Assuming the US is not planning to start cooperating with UNRWA again, where does the money go now? And more importantly, how much of it, if any, is actually earmarked for Palestine?

Rappaport
Oct 2, 2013

Bar Ran Dun posted:

Many decades of allowing them to integrate into our military supply chains allowed this. This is the consequence of decades of choices. It is our fault. But it’s also not active or willing.

Maybe I'm not parsing this right, but I am having difficulty comprehending this statement. Is this situation something analogous to MAD, where small incremental steps by a lot of institutions and people leads to a situation where no one wants to nuke the northern hemisphere to smithereens, but everyone has to agree to commit to it unwillingly, in case general Ripper goes insane? Is that what you mean when you say the US is not active or willing? There's too much institutional inertia at play, on many fronts, that cannot be stopped by human action anymore?

As you state in another post, everything Israel is doing is pretty dang stupid and bad for them as a state, so it seems especially stupid of the US to be an unwilling and "inactive" (sorry if that's bad paraphrasing) participant in this mess of crimes against humanity.

archaeo
Nov 5, 2009

may the power of Hecate compel you

Paladinus posted:

Is there a breakdown somewhere that details how the $26 billion from the recent bill meant 'for Israel and for humanitarian aid in Gaza and other places' will be spent? Assuming the US is not planning to start cooperating with UNRWA again, where does the money go now? And more importantly, how much of it, if any, is actually earmarked for Palestine?

No. it’s all secret. 17 billion is exlicitly military aid, though, and 9 billion humanitarian aid around the world.

quote:

This included $17 billion in defense aid to Israel, and some $9 billion providing humanitarian relief to people in Gaza as well as other war-torn regions (the final decision on allocation was up to the White House, with analysts expecting roughly $2 billion would go to Gaza
Times of Israel

archaeo fucked around with this message at 13:41 on Apr 28, 2024

Goatse James Bond
Mar 28, 2010

If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead

archaeo posted:

No. it’s all secret. 17 billion is exlicitly military aid, though, and 9 billion humanitarian aid around the world.

Times of Israel

It's mostly not that secret. The article itself has the broad strokes breakdown of the 17b a couple paragraphs after what you posted:

quote:

Of the aid to Israel, some $5.2 billion will go toward replenishing and expanding Israel’s missile and rocket defense system; another $3.5 billion will go to purchasing advanced weapons systems; $1 billion to enhance weapons production; $4.4 billion for other defense supplies and services provided to Israel; and some $2.4 billion to US operations in the region amid the Gaza war.

UNRWA isn't the only aid organization on the ground, it's just the best equipped inside Gaza. The US has continued its support of other UN agencies (that often work with UNRWA for distribution lol). By the terms of the bill, the president and the department of state can implement the 9b in aid funds pretty much however they need to.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015

Bar Ran Dun posted:

“The pier will initially enable the transfer of about 90 truckloads of aid per day, the official said, and will eventually ramp up to 150 truckloads per day at full capacity.”

150 truck loads is going to be a approximately 300 Metric Tons of food aid a day, perpetually.

That’s about 661,386 pounds a day. A western diet is usually 3-5 pounds of prepared food day. Food aid is going to be more efficient weight wise than that. It’s enough to feed everybody once they get it going.

That’s the opposite of performative.

How many people do you think are in Gaza right now, and how much food would they need to eat each day to stem famine?

Remember, the sole reason people are starving right now is because US and Israel specifically wish them to.

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Apr 28, 2024

Private Speech
Mar 30, 2011

I HAVE EVEN MORE WORTHLESS BEANIE BABIES IN MY COLLECTION THAN I HAVE WORTHLESS POSTS IN THE BEANIE BABY THREAD YET I STILL HAVE THE TEMERITY TO CRITICIZE OTHERS' COLLECTIONS

IF YOU SEE ME TALKING ABOUT BEANIE BABIES, PLEASE TELL ME TO

EAT. SHIT.


Your Brain on Hugs posted:

The US is now, and has historically, done nothing but aid Israel's attempted extermination of the Palestinian people.

This isn't really true, support for Israel really took off during the height of the Cold War and even then there were many times the US was much less willing to put up with their bollocks.

It's just that Biden, personally, is a huge supporter of Zionism and always has been.

Giggs
Jan 4, 2013

mama huhu
. woops, didn't know shift+enter apparently is a shortcut to post

Fell Fire
Jan 30, 2012


Dante80 posted:

How many people do you think are in Gaza right now, and how much food would they need to eat each day to stem famine?

Remember, the sole reason people are starving right now is because US and Israel specifically wish them to.

To improve on this, there are approximately 2 million people in the Gaza Strip as of 2022. I couldn't find numbers on how many have successfully fled, but it didn't seem like many. 2 million people using that estimate of 4 pounds of food per day is 8,000,000 pounds or 4,000 tons. Bar Ran Dun's estimate comes out to 330 tons. Helpful, but not enough.

Obviously, actual numbers will vary. Feeding a population larger than several U.S. states is a difficult undertaking for any logistics system.

archaeo
Nov 5, 2009

may the power of Hecate compel you

Goatse James Bond posted:

It's mostly not that secret. The article itself has the broad strokes breakdown of the 17b a couple paragraphs after what you posted:

UNRWA isn't the only aid organization on the ground, it's just the best equipped inside Gaza. The US has continued its support of other UN agencies (that often work with UNRWA for distribution lol). By the terms of the bill, the president and the department of state can implement the 9b in aid funds pretty much however they need to.

ah, sorry. while the broad generalities of the military component are available, as you pointed out, I took the context of the inquiry as being about the humanitarian aid to Gaza, which is really unknown. do costs involving the pier count?

VitalSigns
Sep 3, 2011

Gripweed posted:

What are you talking about? Israel gets billions of dollars in military aid from America, we can just yank the leash whenever we want.

The fact that we haven't doesn't mean we can't, it means we don't want to.

While it would be nice if the president could wave a magic wand and cut off aid to Israel just like that, he's not the Green Lantern.

Just think this through: what happens if Biden stops sending lethal aid. That's right, the AIPAC donations dry up, and not just for him, for his entire party. And they need that money for their political careers, they have no choice.

enahs
Jan 1, 2010

Grow up.

VitalSigns posted:

While it would be nice if the president could wave a magic wand and cut off aid to Israel just like that, he's not the Green Lantern.

Just think this through: what happens if Biden stops sending lethal aid. That's right, the AIPAC donations dry up, and not just for him, for his entire party. And they need that money for their political careers, they have no choice.

Good, Biden's should party stop accepting support from the propaganda arm of a genocidal apartheid regime.

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




Rappaport posted:

As you state in another post, everything Israel is doing is pretty dang stupid and bad for them as a state, so it seems especially stupid of the US to be an unwilling and "inactive" (sorry if that's bad paraphrasing) participant in this mess of crimes against humanity.

Over a long period of time we allowed ourselves to become interconnected to their economy in ways that aren’t easy to just shut off like a switch particularly for the military.

It’s analogous to the Germans allowing their chemical production and energy sectors to become so dependent on Russian gas.

The dominant ideology thought that capitalism was magic, basically. That was intensely stupid and was widely encouraged internationally. It also roughly correlated with the expansion of international horizontal JIT supply chains.

We created a situation where they could commit genocide and what we could do about it was limited because of interconnection. The US also contributed to creating a political environment in the Middle East where the Sunni nations would tolerate it.

Yes it was especially stupid.

fool of sound
Oct 10, 2012
Israel’s trade with the US represents 0.8% of total US trade. The US is a quarter of Israel’s. The US holds all the economic cards in that relationship.

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




fool of sound posted:

Israel’s trade with the US represents 0.8% of total US trade. The US is a quarter of Israel’s. The US holds all the economic cards in that relationship.

Which things those 0.8% are matters FOS, if something like the night vision optics for the military is in that side.

Economics brain gets us into these situations by thinking like this.

OctaMurk
Jun 21, 2013

Bar Ran Dun posted:

Which things those 0.8% are matters FOS, if something like the night vision optics for the military is in that side.

Economics brain gets us into these situations by thinking like this.

What are the things that Israel's exporting to the US that the US couldn't get elsewhere, which make this 0.8% so important? Does America and none of the rest of NATO make night vision optics?

Son of Thunderbeast
Sep 21, 2002
Its true indispensable export is power projection in the middle east.

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




OctaMurk posted:

What are the things that Israel's exporting to the US that the US couldn't get elsewhere, which make this 0.8% so important? Does America and none of the rest of NATO make night vision optics?

They make the good ones. It’s also parts for missile and drone interception systems. One can search online to find Israeli right wing taking about the specific things online(also stupid). Air defense and EWS are the other big area.

The crazy thing is our own defense industry gets bitchy about having to compete with Isreali companies we have been subsidizing for these high end things.

It’s all so stupid.

Freudian
Mar 23, 2011

Regrettably Israel has been very helpful for the worst parts of the United States apparatus, so the only realistic choice is to allow just ten percent of Gaza's food needs. Assuming Israel doesn't bomb the pier and say Hamas was hiding under it. I think I'm understanding this correctly.

piL
Sep 20, 2007
(__|\\\\)
Taco Defender

Outrail posted:

The whole pier thing is honestly really dumb. If aid can't reach Gaza the problem is not physical logistics it's politics and red tape. Acting like the pier is critical to humanitarian relief just sounds hollow.

Cairo is a few hundred km from the Gaza strip. The US military has boasted about its logistical capabilities in other parts of the world. And yet suddenly it's not is a really small distance?

Building a pier has already been derided as potential support for and/or literal invasion by some. Landing supplies by amphibious vessels would require large swaths of marines ashore and exposure to the sort of violence/risk that would entail.

It's always absolutely red tape and politics, internal and external. But that's not separate from logistics. Logistics is not just fuel and distance--at this scale its largely is navigating overlapping and conpeting bureaucracies and requirements.



slorb posted:

The only benefit the pier does seem to have it is it makes it harder for settlers to camp out in front of the trucks while the IDF pretends they're trying to move them on.

The pier allows a route that does not cross through Israeli soverign territory. Right now the global community can only convince and coerce to change the inspection policy and let more food in. They can't force the issue except by invading Israel if the only routes are in Israel. UNs not going to agree to that.

Will the global community change their minds about Israeli inspection? Will they use the additional bargaining chip and circumvent the Israelis? Who knows. I suspect this whole thing started as a threat during negotiations, Israel called the bluff, and now the US feels forced to follow through even if it's probably going to not work.

quote:

But I bet they'll just manufacture a "Hamas mortar/rocket attack" on the pier every few days so that it is usually shut.

Who's they?
Why would they have to manufacture attacks? It's in the interest of drat near every regional state and non-state actor to keep the US entangled or to strike at US assets. It's advantageous the individual disorganized paramilitary member to build credibility by making strikes. It's in easy range without extending forces. It may be perceived safer to strike US assets there than Israel since it will be against US interests to do anything about the strikes since the US is desperately trying to get the hell out, and Israel is more likely to turn a blind eye for destroying food aid than for striking Israel.

The attacks will come regardless and the US will need to decide whether to escalate or bail during an election season. The other great economies will continue to stand idly by.

Pentecoastal Elites
Feb 27, 2007

The only reason stopping israel is difficult or impossible is because the economic relationship between israel and the US benefits the people in power in the US. The US could slap the classic draconian sanctions on them tomorrow in the same sense that it could send aid into Gaza or a bunker buster into the Knesset. The US could go without 0.8% of its trade, or even without a producer of night vision goggles. It's completely possible, it could be done. It won't be done because there isn't the political will to do it. The people in power in America benefit from the relationship with israel, and so while ending the genocide is absolutely, completely, 100% in America's power and control, even in ways that don't require bombing Tel Aviv or anything like that, it won't be done.

Son of Thunderbeast posted:

Its true indispensable export is power projection in the middle east.

I'm not sure that's the case, at least any more. Egypt, Jordan, the Saudis, etc. etc. It's no longer that hostile an environment, thanks to decades of that same power projection and imperial exercise of power and control in the region. I think in terms of American empire, israel has just about outlived its usefulness. I think the israelis know that also, and have seen it coming for decades, which is why zionism is so deeply embedded into every strata of American politics and political culture via AIPAC, American Christian zionism, and so on: it is an ongoing project inculcate zionism culturally via insane protestant millennial Christianity, billions and billions of direct political contributions, military R&D agreements, birthright trips, etc. None of this stuff just happened. APIAC isn't what it is today because of some sort of accident. Joe Biden isn't a fervent zionist because he heard a story from his dad or whatever.

I also think this is why israel's days are ultimately numbered. America is losing, in many ways, its capacity for imperial control and extraction and the frontier is going to be cut loose while capital extraction doubles back on the metropol. Today israel is coasting off of those sociopolitical and economic structures it has been building in America for years, but it can't sustain itself if it's no longer backed up by the material need of empire. Anything israel can offer, the US can get it elsewhere and for cheaper. That's why everyone is going fully DEFCON 1 over these campus protests: the kids protesting today, or at least the ones at the elite campuses, are the exact people israel needs to be 100% committed zionists in order to survive

fool of sound
Oct 10, 2012

Bar Ran Dun posted:

Which things those 0.8% are matters FOS, if something like the night vision optics for the military is in that side.

Economics brain gets us into these situations by thinking like this.

I'm absolutely certain that the US can find an alternate source of imports for the extremely short time period before Israel capitulates because US sanctions would devastate their economy instantly.

3rdEyeDeuteranopia
Sep 12, 2007

Bar Ran Dun posted:

They make the good ones. It’s also parts for missile and drone interception systems. One can search online to find Israeli right wing taking about the specific things online(also stupid). Air defense and EWS are the other big area.

The crazy thing is our own defense industry gets bitchy about having to compete with Isreali companies we have been subsidizing for these high end things.

It’s all so stupid.

What thing that Israel sells to the US can't be replaced by an already existing capability by a US or NATO partner or something that could be built from scratch within the next 3 years? None of this is close to semiconductors / chips from Taiwan.

You do run into the issue that if the US actually needed more of any Israeli system quickly during a direct war with Russia and/or China, you would have significant uptick from Iran / Hezbollah / Houthis at the same time. Israel would either have a significantly difficult time using them or use them for themselves like when the US shipped their Iron Dome systems back to Israel recently.

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




fool of sound posted:

I'm absolutely certain that the US can find an alternate source of imports for the extremely short time period before Israel capitulates because US sanctions would devastate their economy instantly.

You should consider how the supply chain crisis played out. That was a short period of not being able to get relatively easy to manufacture poo poo. Where international components were hard to get with limited manufacturers , like electronic displays for automobiles it was disruptive for many years of production.

And the Israelis are willing to genocide.

This isn’t something one should be certain about at all.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
Basically all of the media in the US is calling the campus protests anti semitic. So my question is, what evidence do they have of this because I'm not seeing it? Are they simply calling it anti semitic because the protests are pro Palestinian? Is anyone chanting pro Hamas slogans? I mean the crowds are pretty big so I wouldn't be surprised if there's at least a few actual anti semites but I'm guessing these protests by and large are anti genocide and not anti semitic but of course the media is doing a horrible job of actually representing what they are.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Charliegrs posted:

Basically all of the media in the US is calling the campus protests anti semitic. So my question is, what evidence do they have of this because I'm not seeing it? Are they simply calling it anti semitic because the protests are pro Palestinian? Is anyone chanting pro Hamas slogans? I mean the crowds are pretty big so I wouldn't be surprised if there's at least a few actual anti semites but I'm guessing these protests by and large are anti genocide and not anti semitic but of course the media is doing a horrible job of actually representing what they are.

Yes, the media has largely bought into the false framing that any opposition to fully supporting the state of Israel genociding whoever they please is antisemitism

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
I wouldn't say they've bought into it. I would say they are fully aware that it is a false narrative and are pushing it because they are, willingly or via coercion from above, in service to Israel's agenda.

See the reporting about the behind the scenes fighting in the NYT and CNN newsrooms.

Schubalts
Nov 26, 2007

People say bigger is better.

But for the first time in my life, I think I've gone too far.

Charliegrs posted:

Are they simply calling it anti semitic because the protests are pro Palestinian?

Yes.

DeadlyMuffin
Jul 3, 2007

Charliegrs posted:

Basically all of the media in the US is calling the campus protests anti semitic.

The coverage sucks, but this is a hyperbolic statement that isn't true.

not a value-add
Jan 17, 2019

Bar Ran Dun where did you see Israeli air defense components? Everything I’ve ever worked with is Raytheon. Given the sensitivity of those systems as you move into higher tiers and what happened to things like the Harop it seems stupid to allow foreign production of any parts, especially electronic components. I’m trying to google it and can’t find anything.

not a value-add fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Apr 28, 2024

DeliciousPatriotism
May 26, 2008

Lovely Joe Stalin posted:

See the reporting about the behind the scenes fighting in the NYT and CNN newsrooms.

Can you share some links please?

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Charliegrs posted:

Basically all of the media in the US is calling the campus protests anti semitic. So my question is, what evidence do they have of this because I'm not seeing it?

I think I made a decent post about this in another thread. Basically if you are primed to understand the world through the lens of "people have always hated the Jews and always will, and always make up bullshit reasons for it," then it's easy and comfortable to sort the protests into that pattern and move on. You see a guy say "go back to Poland" or express bloodlust toward Israeli civilians and you say "see, this is a mask-off moment, that's all this movement really is." And this is a pretty common way for Americans to be raised to think about history, because we Americans like to pretend WW2 never really ended - there will always be new Hitlers around the world who need America, the sword and shield of liberal democracy, to confront them.

Certainly easier than considering that your country/religious identity/political identity might be highly involved with a seriously criminal state.

Civilized Fishbot posted:

I know a lot of people who think this way. It's not complicated. It's just cynicism, arguably motivated cynicism.

If someone is mad about Israel, there's an X% probability that it's because their conscience tells them to be furious about injustice, and a Y% probability that it's because they're just bigoted against an ethnoreligious identity that's been a boogeyman of chauvinist ideology for literal millenia. If you're cynical about people, and both modern news and social media are basically designed to make you cynical about people, you're reticent to evaluate them as loving and sincere, instead you're prone to evaluate them as hateful and dishonest, so X is low and Y is high.

And if you have an emotional attachment to Israel or a certain vision of Jewish identity, you want Israel to be good (so it can't be X) and you want Israel to be necessary (so you kinda want it to be Y). And if you came up in mainstream Jewish-American culture, you were taught about ~1950 years where it really was Y all along, so there's a "boy who cried wolf" effect. You were taught "there are always people who hate the Jews, don't listen to them" in a way that makes it very easy to just fold Palestinians and pro-Palestinians into that category.

And then the design of social media and modern news is that you're exposed mostly to people who agree with you, and then the most outrageous examples of people who disagree with you. You see clips from anti-Israel protests and it's algorithmically designed so that they'll vastly disproportionately highlight the random assholes who show up and say "go back to Poland" or whatever. And you think, see, they're finally going mask off, this is what they all are deep down. We knew it all along, nobody really cares about Palestine this much, yes it's ugly but what's going on in places like Sudan is so much worse, and nobody talks about that...

Anyway that's the thought process of all the people I know who talk(ed) like this.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Apr 28, 2024

Gripweed
Nov 8, 2018

ASK ME ABOUT MY
UNITED STATES MARINES
FUNKO POPS COLLECTION



VitalSigns posted:

While it would be nice if the president could wave a magic wand and cut off aid to Israel just like that, he's not the Green Lantern.

Just think this through: what happens if Biden stops sending lethal aid. That's right, the AIPAC donations dry up, and not just for him, for his entire party. And they need that money for their political careers, they have no choice.

Well, no, they like the money but they don't need it. We've just seen primaries where the AIPAC-backed candidate didn't win, so we know AIPAC money is not the secret sauce that guarantees victory. You can win without it.

And once again, this is a situation where the blowback on Israel would be way worse. Right now, Israel is a solid bi-partisan issue. If AIPAC stopped all money flowing to Democrats and exclusively backed Republicans, do you really think it would stay that way? I put it to you that it would not. That would turn Israel into a partisan issue, and endanger the flow of aid Israel needs to keep it's monstrous apartheid state operating.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

DeliciousPatriotism posted:

Can you share some links please?

I'm afraid I don't have the links to hand, but I'm pretty sure they were posted in this thread, which is why I referred to them.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

DeliciousPatriotism posted:

Can you share some links please?

I don't remember any stories about CNN, but there were a lot about tribulations at the NYT over their reporting on sexual violence on October 7.

quote:

Tensions at The New York Times over an investigative report on Hamas' use of sexual violence in the October 7th attacks have erupted into the open over the past week with fresh conflict surfacing nearly every day.

The Times crisis reflects a series of cultural divides – between the conventional newsroom and the paper's ascendant audio division; between management and many of the rank-and-file; between factions with differing reactions to the war in Israel and Gaza; and between the two sides of yawning industry chasm over whether to handle dissent internally or air it in public.

https://www.npr.org/2024/03/06/1236130609/new-york-times-hamas-attacks-israel-palestine

Sundance Shot
Oct 24, 2010

DeliciousPatriotism posted:

Can you share some links please?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/feb/04/cnn-staff-pro-israel-bias

quote:

CNN staff say network’s pro-Israel slant amounts to ‘journalistic malpractice’

https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt-israel-gaza-genocide-palestine-coverage/

quote:

LEAKED NYT GAZA MEMO TELLS JOURNALISTS TO AVOID WORDS “GENOCIDE,” “ETHNIC CLEANSING,” AND “OCCUPIED TERRITORY”
Amid the internal battle over the New York Times’s coverage of Israel’s war, top editors handed down a set of directives.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

3rdEyeDeuteranopia
Sep 12, 2007

Gripweed posted:

Well, no, they like the money but they don't need it. We've just seen primaries where the AIPAC-backed candidate didn't win, so we know AIPAC money is not the secret sauce that guarantees victory. You can win without it.

And once again, this is a situation where the blowback on Israel would be way worse. Right now, Israel is a solid bi-partisan issue. If AIPAC stopped all money flowing to Democrats and exclusively backed Republicans, do you really think it would stay that way? I put it to you that it would not. That would turn Israel into a partisan issue, and endanger the flow of aid Israel needs to keep it's monstrous apartheid state operating.

It's still a very high win percentage.

The bigger issue with Israel is so many moderate / center voters think they are or were ever an ally to the United States instead of just a one-way beneficiary.

Once that lie is widely debunked, it's a much safer partisan issue.

https://twitter.com/AIPAC/status/1590362232915132417?lang=en

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply