406
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
406 points (99.3% liked)
politics
19246 readers
2775 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Good. Not a fucking dime until Ukraine gets much needed funding. And then still not a fucking dime because Israel has proven to be quite capable of leveling Gaza with the resources they already have and are at absolutely 0 risk of losing any territory whatsoever.
What if we fund Ukraine's defense instead of Israel's offense?
I was under the impression there was Ukraine aid in this bill. But I agree, I'd rather fund them separately.
Edit: And Israel not at all, at the moment.
The Senate bill has Ukraine aid, border security stuff, and "aid" for Israel. Mike Johnson was throwing a tantrum that the GOP/Dem Senate leadership didn't include him in their negotiations (seriously, he sent out a letter to the House yesterday morning whining about it) so he decided to bring a bill up with just "aid" for Israel.
As you can see, he is continuing the proud tradition of effective GOP Speakers. 🙄
The speaker of the house is mad that he wasn't involved in senate business? Sounds like a fucking excuse to me.
The speaker doesn't have to be involved in all things. They aren't on every committee.
Yes, the speaker of the house really shouldn't be involved in senate business. That's what I was saying. It was a bullshit excuse on the speaker's part.
The Speaker typically has major sway over the budget even though they aren't on the Ways and Means Committee.
That said, it is usually tradition for the Senate to come up with the compromise when the House and President are at odds and can't negotiate their own deal.
I imagine that during bipartisan Senate negotiations it'd be prudent and/or courteous to include the House leadership as well, to avoid this exact kind of embarrassment.
Could someone explain what's the argument in favor of US funding Israel with these amounts other than securing a geopolitical partner in middle east?
Israel is not even a good geopolitical partner in the Middle East. Nearly everyone hates them so whenever we do operations over there we keep them out because we know even their presence will increase tensions and lose hearts and minds. They're good for spying on Iran but you have to take everything with a grain of salt because they could be lying in order to try and get us to be more confrontational because they despise Iran.
The reasons the U.S. government overwhelmingly supports Israel is:
Your list is spot on, and what's interesting about it is the strange bedfellows it creates. You have a coalition of literal Nazis, Orthodox Jews, and Intelligence Agencies calling for more bombs to fight fascism and spread democracy.
The thing about American Nazis is, yes they are virulently anti-Semitic but they also are usually fiercely steeped in their twisted version of Christianity, which says the Jews have to be in Israel for Armageddon to happen. Then they'll get their heavenly rewards while the rest of us are punished forever, since they see us as the cause of all their problems.
They're perfectly willing to tolerate Jews' existence, as long as it's not here in America.
I think you mean AIPAC.
Yeah your right, got it confused with a conference around here that they still have ads up for. Edited
Modern day Christianity is a death cult begging for the end of the world to happen and according to their mythology, Israel has to occupy that particular piece of dirt, regardless of whoever is already there. And since a still-significant portion of the American electorate are superstitious and arms manufacturers are so wealthy, our politicians are more than happy to pander to the one to take donations from the other.
It's even more sinister than that even; not only are they looking forward to the world ending, they think that they are the only ones getting into "heaven" and everyone else will be tormented in "hell" forever.
They look forward to the few million of them getting a "reward" while the other 10 billion people burn. That's the mentality of a lunatic that doesn't deserve to be allowed in civilization, but instead, society had deemed their lunacy a protected class.
Nevermind that their own Bible says specifically that only 144k people will get into heaven and even then it's only male Jewish virgins.
Besides the religious angle, the funding we give to Israel tends to come right back into the pockets of US military contractors. This is great if you like military contractors. I'm not one of those people, but they apparently exist.
Because they are the only reasonable geopolitical partner in the middle east. Every other country there is fucking with oil prices every 4 years for political gain. Also passively or actively supporting terrorism.
US desires stability over all else. Israel is committed to stability as well because stability improves their ability to detect and subvert terrorism against them.
Israel allows the US to project power into the region.
Too many politicians support genocide for its own sake. Some of them are even Republicans.
Not wrong, but namecalling goes too far.
Joe Biden did not need to circumvent congress twice in order to support Netanyahu's genocide. No one was clamoring for it. No one would have blamed him if he didn't.
37 Senate Democrats voted against placing conditions on aid for Israel.
If Democrats don't want people saying they support genocide, they should quit supporting genocide.
Yes. Notice how the Republicans would just openly support genocide in Gaza AND pull out of Ukraine.
The point IS NOT that Democrats are somehow "good". I never said that. In fact, I say the opposite all the time. My point is they're still better than the Republicans, and any attempt to imply otherwise is pure stupidity.
Why do you want to engage in stupidity?
Democrats' genocide is more moral than Republicans' genocide. Congratulations. Democrats should not be supporting genocide and until they stop, those that do should be treated with the contempt they have earned.
But instead you're calling me stupid for criticizing them.
No one is supporting genocide here. I literally said the Democrats are not good... Why do you insist on strawmanning everyone? Are you a child or just an edgy moron?
So why are you calling me stupid for criticizing the party to which I belong because I don't want them supporting genocide? I gave examples of Democrats doing just that. You ignored that and started slinging abuse. I doubt you'll ever stop.
I can criticize Republicans on this, but them being fascist shit on their best day has never been in question.
You are constantly assuming the positions of those you are talking about and to.
I said Democrats support genocide. You started calling me names immediately. I gave examples, you added additional insults.
If you don't support genocide, why are you so combative towards those who don't want Democrats supporting genocide?