Biden’s administration approach to this conflict is to tacitly fund a genocide and veto all UN resolutions to end it, all while making weak protests.
Eventually it started shipping token humanitarian aid after several other countries started doing that - but I’m pretty sure it ships less aid for the Palestinians than bombs to be used on them.
Contrast with the US approach to a similar situation in Ethiopia’s Tigray province a couple of years back, which involved economic sanctions.
It would not stop Israel. Just imagine if similar attack happened on US. We would retaliate and the UN be dammed. Actually, you do not have to imagine. A smaller attack (as % of US population) on Sept 11 resulted in two wars with popular support at the beginning!
I don’t agree. As well as arms, Israel relies on political support from the US to block UN intervention.
There is growing international appetite for UN intervention in this matter. The African Union is always particularly interested in it, especially South Africa.
Without US military protection of Israel some of the Arab nations would also be interested in military intervention and I wouldn’t be surprised if Indonesia (the largest Muslim country in the world) would be as well.
UN would never have military intervention in this. Nothing else would stop Israel. They are really angry on Hamas, more so than we were after sept. 11. And US would never press on Israel militarily either, because the president that would, would be impeached the same day.
You seem to be confusing the fact that the US will not withdraw support from Israel, with the idea that it can’t. It can. And the world does have some history of cross-national intervention in high profile genocides.
You have brought up the US response to 11 Sept. This too involved a number of war crimes. It’s not a persuasive argument. None of it makes me sympathetic to the genocidaires or to Biden’s tacit support of them.
Genocide and human rights abuses against civilians are never an appropriate response to anger at terrorist actions.
Why the hell not? The only thing keeping the UN off Israel’s back is the US. And by itself Israel has no veto so the UN could actually do something.
Likewise, why do you think a us president that intervened in Israel militarily would get impeached? The presidency is structured so that the president has a lot of leeway in military action, which presidents have used to great effect. E.g. Iraq was horrible and based on a lie but nobody got impeached after
Biden’s administration approach to this conflict is to tacitly fund a genocide and veto all UN resolutions to end it, all while making weak protests.
Eventually it started shipping token humanitarian aid after several other countries started doing that - but I’m pretty sure it ships less aid for the Palestinians than bombs to be used on them.
Contrast with the US approach to a similar situation in Ethiopia’s Tigray province a couple of years back, which involved economic sanctions.
It would not stop Israel. Just imagine if similar attack happened on US. We would retaliate and the UN be dammed. Actually, you do not have to imagine. A smaller attack (as % of US population) on Sept 11 resulted in two wars with popular support at the beginning!
I don’t agree. As well as arms, Israel relies on political support from the US to block UN intervention.
There is growing international appetite for UN intervention in this matter. The African Union is always particularly interested in it, especially South Africa.
Without US military protection of Israel some of the Arab nations would also be interested in military intervention and I wouldn’t be surprised if Indonesia (the largest Muslim country in the world) would be as well.
UN would never have military intervention in this. Nothing else would stop Israel. They are really angry on Hamas, more so than we were after sept. 11. And US would never press on Israel militarily either, because the president that would, would be impeached the same day.
You seem to be confusing the fact that the US will not withdraw support from Israel, with the idea that it can’t. It can. And the world does have some history of cross-national intervention in high profile genocides.
You have brought up the US response to 11 Sept. This too involved a number of war crimes. It’s not a persuasive argument. None of it makes me sympathetic to the genocidaires or to Biden’s tacit support of them.
Genocide and human rights abuses against civilians are never an appropriate response to anger at terrorist actions.
Why the hell not? The only thing keeping the UN off Israel’s back is the US. And by itself Israel has no veto so the UN could actually do something.
Likewise, why do you think a us president that intervened in Israel militarily would get impeached? The presidency is structured so that the president has a lot of leeway in military action, which presidents have used to great effect. E.g. Iraq was horrible and based on a lie but nobody got impeached after
deleted by creator