Whatever the fuck they want. Both American parties are pro-genocide, and their voters are either too stupid or too scared to demand otherwise. Its relevant because Israel could be doing absolutely none of this without US backing. US voters had (and somewhat still have) an opportunity to demand from their candidates but as I said, either too stupid or too scared to demand it.
Support for Israel is “off the table” in American politics. It’s something that won’t even be offered to voters as a choice. I remember when globalization was like this. Between Ross Perot and Donald Trump you had zero candidates on either side who were anti-globalization.
It’s so shameful what greed and broken electoral finance laws in the U.S. have done to the country. Right now, an investment of a few million by a PAC can turn into billions of dollars from the government, via direct aid, passing laws, or simply looking the other way if a company isn’t being too obviously evil.
The primaries this year were highly telling in that regard - politicians were being nakedly bought in plain sight, but, again, because “you don’t fuck with the money” it’s not a question in political circles of whether overhauling campaign finance should be undertaken.
Yeah. The silver lining is that, for specific issues, eventually the dam bursts and public opinion can overwhelm. But it can take a long time.
Ross Perot was the most successful third party candidate in American history since William Jennings Bryan. And yet, for nearly two decades both parties refused to adopt his policies on trade despite their overwhelming popularity and the obvious benefit electorally.
BTW The bigger issue with campaign finance is our radical right activist supreme court. We used to have a lot of laws limiting what money could do in politics but the court has dismantled most of them.
Israel has amassed such an arsenal, it can continue this shit on it’s own for a good while. An arms embargo would still be appropriate though
Voters are demanding a cease fire and have been for a long time. No one is scared. A lot of people have enough national problems to worry about, that they put first
Israel has amassed such an arsenal, it can continue this shit on it’s own for a good while. An arms embargo would still be appropriate though
No way. First they can’t use some of those weapons without US approval. They’re made that way. Second, if they were running a more normal terror campaign (like shock and awe for example) that’d be correct, but they’re not. They’re carpet bombing Gaza and Lebanon using “precision” airstrikes. It’s an incredibly wasteful method of genocide that only has the advantage of being able to say “but we’re targeting terrorists”. No way they can keep up this nonsense without unlimited US weapons. Third, Israel would be eaten alive by its neighbors without US diplomatic (or “diplomatic”) support. Do you understand how much support any middle eastern leader would get by sayint “We’ll go fight Israel to save our Palestinian brothers”? The only reason it’s not happening and even Iran is leaving the job to its militias is because of the US carrot and stick.
Whatever the fuck they want. Both American parties are pro-genocide, and their voters are either too stupid or too scared to demand otherwise. Its relevant because Israel could be doing absolutely none of this without US backing. US voters had (and somewhat still have) an opportunity to demand from their candidates but as I said, either too stupid or too scared to demand it.
Now Israel has carte blanc.
Support for Israel is “off the table” in American politics. It’s something that won’t even be offered to voters as a choice. I remember when globalization was like this. Between Ross Perot and Donald Trump you had zero candidates on either side who were anti-globalization.
It’s so shameful what greed and broken electoral finance laws in the U.S. have done to the country. Right now, an investment of a few million by a PAC can turn into billions of dollars from the government, via direct aid, passing laws, or simply looking the other way if a company isn’t being too obviously evil.
The primaries this year were highly telling in that regard - politicians were being nakedly bought in plain sight, but, again, because “you don’t fuck with the money” it’s not a question in political circles of whether overhauling campaign finance should be undertaken.
Yeah. The silver lining is that, for specific issues, eventually the dam bursts and public opinion can overwhelm. But it can take a long time.
Ross Perot was the most successful third party candidate in American history since William Jennings Bryan. And yet, for nearly two decades both parties refused to adopt his policies on trade despite their overwhelming popularity and the obvious benefit electorally.
BTW The bigger issue with campaign finance is our radical right activist supreme court. We used to have a lot of laws limiting what money could do in politics but the court has dismantled most of them.
Things I agree with:
Things I disagree with:
No way. First they can’t use some of those weapons without US approval. They’re made that way. Second, if they were running a more normal terror campaign (like shock and awe for example) that’d be correct, but they’re not. They’re carpet bombing Gaza and Lebanon using “precision” airstrikes. It’s an incredibly wasteful method of genocide that only has the advantage of being able to say “but we’re targeting terrorists”. No way they can keep up this nonsense without unlimited US weapons. Third, Israel would be eaten alive by its neighbors without US diplomatic (or “diplomatic”) support. Do you understand how much support any middle eastern leader would get by sayint “We’ll go fight Israel to save our Palestinian brothers”? The only reason it’s not happening and even Iran is leaving the job to its militias is because of the US carrot and stick.
Good point