549
submitted 2 years ago by shish_mish@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Unaware7013@kbin.social 21 points 2 years ago

If he wasn't, he's be called an antisemitic jew hater for daring question the Israeli narrative. Anything less than full throated support is akin to supporting Hamas according to a very large amount of stupid and/or intellectually dishonest people.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

You aren't wrong, but he's been ride-or-die for Israel for his entire career. He's the most pro-Israel president we've ever had.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Reagan was seriously pro-Israel and started the whole US-supported Israeli military funding. source

Jen Kirby - You mentioned that the United States had a big investment in the Iron Dome. Why is that — what’s the US’s stake in this?

Jean-Loup Samaan - Well, first, historically, the US started cooperating with Israel on air defense in the 1980s. So when missile defense became a significant component of defense investment in the US, Israel was very quickly involved. There’s a history of close ties between both countries in that field. So it would seem, in a sense, natural that a consequence of that is to support something like Iron Dome.

I think it was around the end of Obama’s first term, in 2012, that the US put a stronger emphasis on Iron Dome in terms of budgeting. I believe it was probably not just the politics behind it, but also the strategic assessment that the priority is to protect and to strengthen the defense of Israel vis-à-vis these types of rockets.

[-] jasory@programming.dev -3 points 2 years ago

Started? How geopolitically ignorant are you? A considerable portion of the IDF's armaments (including over 100 fighter jets) during the Yom Kippur War were flown in from the US. This was seven years before Reagan. The entirety of Israel's existence has just been the US and France dumping weapons. (Israel didn't indigenously make it's nuclear weapons, they came from France's nuclear projects, just like how the Kfir wasn't built using Israel's non-existent aerospace industry).

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

I quoted a source. If you don't agree with it, quote another.

And please don't call me ignorant. It's rude and uncalled for.

[-] jasory@programming.dev -2 points 2 years ago

"I quoted a source"

I can smash on a keyboard and then write a citation to whatever nonsense comes. An intelligent person cross-references it with well established facts, and then decides if it's probably true.

The idea that US support for Israel started in the 80s is refuted by hundreds of data points in Israeli history.

"It's rude and uncalled for"

It's totally called for. You could literally have read the Wikipedia on history of modern Israel and seen that it was patently false.

this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
549 points (98.4% liked)

News

35849 readers
935 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS