455
U.S. official: Biden realized Netanyahu lied to him about hostage deal
(www.haaretz.com)
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 05 Aug 2024
455 points (95.2% liked)
News
23397 readers
2503 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
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.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
"if israel didn't exist we would have to invent one to protect our interests in the region"
Over the course of the Genocide the notion that we really want israel to exist as a strategic ally has started to look extremely wonky to me.
Looking at previous history as well, I have concluded the "strategic partner" narrative is purely an excuse for israeli lobbyists. Such as the best funded lobbyist for israel
That is absolutely a factor, but there are also absolutely people who view this as an important part of American power projection. While I don't think that supporting Israel has been making the US stronger in this era, it has historically been a key strategic location due to how close it is to the suez and global oil trade.
It is darkly funny how cheaply American politicians can be bought, meanwhile we shovel endless piles of money to Israel, which it then uses to shore up political support for continuing to send them money and ammunition.
Egypt controls Suez though. We just overthrew their government and installed Sisi as a dictator to control it. Israel had little to do with that. Same with Iraq. We use Saudi Arabia as a base.
Israel as a strategic partner is a great excuse on the surface because really blurs the line of the true motive. But in reality we now see America supporting israeli actions which are contradictory to our interests in the region (unless we really want WW3). Having a strategic partner requires that partner to obey you, not the other way around
I'm not gonna start debating you on this, I was referring to the historical reason for the occupation of Palestine, quoting Churchill:
I say that Palestine is all the more important to us in view of what is happening, in view of the ever-growing significance to the British Empire of the Suez Canal; and I do not think £1,000,000 a year [...] would be too much for Great Britain to pay for the control and guardianship of this great historic land
There was no AIPAC then, unless you're suggesting that there was some other lobbying at play.
US strategic planners wanted Israel because it's an unsinkable aircraft carrier parked right next to the Suez (among other things). That doesn't mean that it's actually useful at the end of the day, but that's absolutely the stated logic behind things.
I certainly don’t disagree that it is an advantageous piece of land. Which is why it was one of the best OG Hasbara points.
The problem is that we already control Egypt and have military bases over the entire region. Israel wants to be autonomous. We can give israel weapons but we are not allowed to control what they will do with said weapons. Whereas with other countries we just topple their regime if they don’t listen.
Then there’s Incidents such as the USS liberty. Israel tries to make America go to war with Egypt by committing a false flag attack on an American ship and blaming it on Egypt Or how israel is currently desperately trying to pull us into a war with Iran. This is not how a having an ally in the region works.
There is no denying that Palestine has great placement geographically but the amount of flak we are currently taking because israel acts like a rabid attack dog while we still provide them weapons “against our will” goes directly against israel being a strategic ally. This only leaves israeli lobbies such as AIPAC controlling our politicians as a real explanation of israel still receiving weapons.
Unless we're trying to evoke a war with Iran ourselves, but I don't see that as a possibility.
The 'lot of flak' the US is getting is hurting them a lot less than more concrete things like the trade disruptions due to the red sea shipping attacks. The occupation failing to keep a lid on things has absolutely put its immediate strategic value into question, that has not always been the case.
I am aware that the US government is completely beholden to financial influence, however I don't care for the narrative being 'the real explanation is that israel is controlling our politicians' that's really the reductive angle. You can point to the numbers of donations to politicians, but there's also a tremendous power wielded by the military industries. They are often the sole or anchor employers in cities across the country and any cut to buying weapons gets framed as cutting jobs for everyday Joes. Those weapons then get gifted to people who use them on civilians.
Which also is caused by America not forcing israel to stop their Genocide for some reason...
Of course politicians aren't solely beholden to israel. There are plenty of other lobby organizations which get what they want because they bribe politicians. Oil lobbies, Agro lobbies, Pharma lobbies etc. Military Industrial lobby of course loves what israel is doing right now.
It's just that when it comes to israel, the politicians act the way israel wants instead of in a strategically advantageous way for America. There's not much of a case that can be made for the current government actions other than "Our politicians are bribed by israel"
Past israel did a far better job appealing to politicians to make a case for their existence than current israel though I'll agree with that. Hasbro game is weak these days.
For some Americans, the perception that they're a settler state fighting off the brown horde is reason enough for common cause.
And ironically much of the the anti-Arab propaganda also has its roots in israel. (and this article for a deeper dive)
But of course racism is not really a realpolitik objective.
I could never understand the guys appeal and always found his movies pretty offensive.
yeah
Well the US have been busy inventing a back up for decades now.
Who else in the middle east has a sizable population that spans many countries which, in the case of independence, would conveniently destabilize the middle east yet wholely depend on the US for survival, as it would be completely surrounded by sworn enemies, therefore would have to act as a defacto US state in foreign affairs?
Anyway, we are halfway there now and the rest shouldn't take too long
I don't really follow what you're trying to say. I'm not sure there is a viable backup to Israel as a client state in the region.
You’ll see liberals and fascists do this often, they try to play the same “leading question” game leftists use but it just falls completely flat since their deranged worldview instantly falls apart under any scrutiny.
Like, literally what are they even talking about? It makes no sense lmfao.