Anonymous #1 2w

if you want the US to fully disengage from israel in all ways then the situation will get wayyyyy worse in the region. as for actually solving the conflict and getting a lasting peace, yeah thats an incredibly complex and delicate issue

-9

Anonymous OP 2w

How exactly would the situation get worse in the event that the United States stopped backing the country that checks off every box for “apartheid” and like half the boxes for genocide?

19

Anonymous OP 2w

Is “the situation getting worse” just Israel getting its comeuppance? Because like, yeah man, I don’t weep for Dresden either.

20

Anonymous #1 2w

because a strong relationship with the US acts as a security guarantee, and without that the only way israel feels it can guarantee its security is by more offensive action. its why the israeli far right actually doesnt like the relationship w the US, they view it somewhat as golden handcuffs

-6

Anonymous #1 2w

You think the United States divesting from Israel wouldn’t see Israel doing 10x shit? You haven’t seen them with the gloves off lol.

-7

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I mean they might nuke themselves and everyone around them which would be pretty fuckin bad but barring the Nuclear Option, they’d be fucked without American money. They literally have none of their own. All they have is a gift from us.

14

Anonymous OP 2w

“Golden handcuffs” I guess the chain between them is 8 feet long and made of aluminum then, because it sure looks like America lets Israel do whatever the hell it wants.

12

Anonymous #1 2w

The nuclear option is always the last option. In reality, the wars get more dangerous and you’d see their society militarize like nothing you’ve ever seen before. I’m not trying to say that arming Israel is good, I’m simply saying that divesting would be a really REALLY bad thing for the people in that region.

-5

Anonymous OP 2w

Ayyyyy people who understand the golden handcuffs concept and most likely the further right political position in Israeli politics.

-5

Anonymous #1 2w

Like shit dawg Israel is allowed to sink US Naval vessels and if you talk about that, you get called an antisemite, what fucking handcuffs?

15

Anonymous vintage_trampler 2w

done what

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

lol so your argument is we have to back & fund Israel’s apartheid & genocide because if we don’t Israel would create a super apartheid & do a super genocide?

7

Anonymous #5 2w

no the argument is that the issue is more complicated than simply burning the bridge with israel, because the outcomes of that will be worse for everybody

-3

Anonymous OP 2w

That’s what I said. You’re saying if we simply stop funding their genocide & apartheid Israel will somehow do an even bigger genocide & worse apartheid so we can’t just stop funding the current one

15

Anonymous #5 2w

Exactly what OP said just now. My point isn’t an absolute and I’m not trying to represent it that way at all. It’s not an issue that can be solved by either supporting them blowing up Palestinians or completely pulling support and diplomatic ties. If you back them into a corner, they will almost certainly lash out far worse. Yeah, you’d see more dead IDF soldiers, but they would mobilize their entire civilian populace and invade ALL of Lebanon, probably go from genocide to total extinction.

-4

Anonymous #5 2w

I think if we’re worried about Israel nuking themselves we just gotta do it first

17

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

love to see how you’re still consistent in your genocidal mania

8

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Got it so agin we must continue to fund the genocide, apartheid, and annexations that Israel is currently doing because if we don’t they will do all the same things but harder

4

Anonymous #5 2w

no, read this carefully bc youre not getting it. we can do lots of things like condition aid, block arms sales, etc. but getting rid of normalized relations with israel would be disastrous for the region. when you get rid of the security agreement, the situation will degrade. the solution has to be more nuanced than simply burning the bridge

-3

Anonymous OP 2w

the situation has already degraded, if you somehow didn’t realize. except we don’t do any of that, we instead CONTINUALLY fund and arm this ongoing genocide.

13

Anonymous OP 2w

I love how your argument is the equivalent of saying we can’t simply stop being friends with Nazi Germany because they would crash out even harder then they’re currently doing in Europe so we still help them out still but place conditions on the aid & block some of the weapons. How not cutting ties with Nazis Germany is ultimately good for Europe

15

Anonymous #6 2w

i mean if you think its all as simple as america fully withdrawing any and all support for israel then you have a fundamentally naive and incomplete view here and i guarantee you would not want the result of that

-3

Anonymous #5 2w

the situation is fundamentally different than that lmao but okay

-2

Anonymous OP 2w

You don’t understand we have to back the apartheid country doing a genocide or their apartheid & genocide will get worst & if you disagree is because you’re not as smart as me the person claiming we need to support someone doing an apartheid & genocide in order to prevent them from doing a super apartheid & genocide 🙃

10

Anonymous OP 2w

Yes, do please continue justifying the funding of genocide. our alliance is the equivalence of the modern axis power, what do you think will happen in the long term if not only Israel, but both Israel and the United states openly commits genocide without any retaliation or consequences? I can assure you that any answer less than world war is rooted in delusion.

12

Anonymous #5 2w

do you think if you say apartheid and genocide enough times youll morally grandstand into being correct about geopolitical realities?

-3

Anonymous #6 2w

i havent justified anything bud, youre just too stupid to understand a nuanced point

-2

Anonymous OP 2w

so you’re ready to cut ties with the nation committing colonial genocide?

12

Anonymous #6 2w

No, don’t you understand, the rules-based order only applies when the person breaking the rules is an enemy of the United States. If you’re Israel, you get to do it, because if we cut them off they’ll just use all of our weapons to destroy everyone around them immediately.

11

Anonymous #6 2w

Has nothing to do with mania and everything to do with preventing more lives lost. I have said time and time again, I am not defending Israel even remotely, I’m saying think of a better idea.

-4

Anonymous #6 2w

no not fully, because for the 10th time the situation in the region will get worse

-2

Anonymous OP 2w

While Harris would’ve probably been bad in foreign policy, she would’ve been good in domestic policy

7

Anonymous #5 2w

I don’t know why you don’t want to engage with the point at all. You keep reiterating that it’s either stop funding a genocide or fund a genocide. You’re not a fucking idiot, so I don’t know why you pretend to be one. You know exactly the level of complexity we’re talking about. This is literally real politics, not some culture war shit that can be solved with a one-off decision that ends the conversation entirely.

-3

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

don’t mistake my critique of you as an invitation for a conversation.

11

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

How come you never seem to have the better ideas you claim exist?

9

Anonymous #6 2w

You the crazy fuck who suggested a UN coalition invade Israel and the United States?

-2

Anonymous OP 2w

and I couldn’t give a fuck whether you think so or not, the situation already consists of unrestricted genocide. you meant to say that it will get worse *for you*, because you’re mostly not affected by it currently.

10

Anonymous OP 2w

So what I’m hearing is we have to not only cut ties with Israel, we have to cripple Israel ourselves if we don’t want the conditions to get even worse after we cut ties?

5

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

and I stand by it, as you tried vilifying Palestinians and redirecting the fault of genocide onto them. go ahead and block me again, you dense ass dipshit ;)

6

Anonymous #6 2w

So we’re just lying now?

-2

Anonymous #6 2w

I’m still waiting for those list of countries who give a fuck enough about the Palestinians that most definitely want to invade Israel to stop this genocide btw.

-3

Anonymous #1 2w

yeah probably thats why im saying its not a real solution. the solution is to maintain the mutual security relationship and exert pressure through cutting off aid and arms sales

0

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

did you not try bullshitting and claiming Palestinians were the aggressors for, and I quote, “lobbing rockets”?

9

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Ahh, here it is actually.

6

Anonymous #6 2w

not “lobbing rockets” exactly, but my point stands.

10

Anonymous OP 2w

So cut the ties one by one, and allow them to continue their policies of apartheid and genocide in the meantime?

5

Anonymous #1 2w

This is one of those concepts where you know what the worst of all decisions are, which there are two. Completely divesting from Israel completely OR outright sending in US troops/planes to help them kill off the Palestinians. Everything in between is where a hopeful solution exists.

-2

Anonymous #6 2w

How is that vilifying Palestinians btw?

-2

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I couldn’t give a fuck what you’re waiting for, I’m waiting for you not to be a little sack of shit. why’d you clear your block list btw? or do you only block people to avoid acknowledging when you’re wrong or fucked up?

7

Anonymous #1 2w

you understand that cutting all ties also allows them to continue their actions in the gaza and west bank right? only in that world we have 0 levers to pressure them

-1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

“bombing the fuck out of Israel and …” meanwhile Israel is committing fucking genocide, and has been colonizing Palestine for decades. you’re a genuine piece of shit.

4

Anonymous #6 2w

No. I blocked you temporarily because you tried to shit up a separate conversation entirely because you’re so assmad that you got blown the fuck out in that conversation about Israel/Palestine. You suggested a literal crazy maniac idea of sending in ground troops to INVADE Israel AND the United States of America. Which is a literal bloodlust fantasy for you because it’s not realistic at all lol. There’s a reason you can’t give the names of the countries…it’s because it doesn’t exist.

-1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

you blocked me the second I called you a “dense ass dipshit”, shut the fuck up you self righteous sack of shit. it wasn’t even during the UN conversation, so it looks like yes, you are indeed lying.

3

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

had to switch off the topic of your vilification of Palestinians real quick, didn’t you?

4

Anonymous #6 2w

Bro how are you just making up positions for me? 🤣 You realize this just isn’t going to end for you the way you think it is? I post enough on here where people know they can just ask my positions and I will give them my thoughts based on me trying to describe my logic process behind the thoughts.

-5

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I directly posted your position, you dumb fuck.

11

Anonymous #6 2w

Yes. You did that in an entirely different thread like a day or two later 🤣 You are unhinged.

-2

and now we’re fully in la la land lmao. america is never directly bombing a nuclear power

-1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I’ll take unhinged over being a genocidal piece of shit any day of the week.

13

Anonymous #6 2w

Where does that say anything about lobbing rockets or blaming Palestinians?😭 That was in direct response to you hinting at sending in ground troops to invade Israel until I actually got you to just explicitly say it outright.

-2

Anonymous #6 2w

You are literal both 🤣 You literally used genocidal rhetoric for your position.

-2

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

no it wasn’t, it was in a conversation about the one state vs two state pathways. and the fuck are you talking about, you narcissistic dumbass? I specifically and explicitly stated how I wanted a UN intervention, you didn’t “get” me to say that, I said it myself. so you think the world revolves around you and your mania?

10

Anonymous #6 2w

do you*

9

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Joker, please don’t tell me you’re one of those “allowing the Palestinians to live in their own land would literally be genocide” Zionists lmao I know you’re smarter than that

8

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

resorting to projection now, huh? go ahead and cite where i advocated for genocide in any manner? did we commit genocide during world war 2 by combatting the third reich? because as I repeatedly stated in that conversation you’re referencing, what I advocate for is the exact same response the international community gave the axis powers (aka, the creation of a militant allies power)

5

Anonymous #6 2w

You couldn’t name the countries then btw.

-2

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I guess I can engage on a serious level. I’ll be honest the reason I wasn’t before is because I thought the augment that you & OP are making is dumb & not well thought out… but I’ll give you guys a serious response now. Not only is Israel & an apartheid state committing a genocide which is morally wrong to support but your argument ignores the fact that Israel wouldn’t be able to do the vast majority of it’s current actions without our support. Much of the world rightfully sees Israel an an

8

Anonymous #5 2w

Extension of the U.S. so to go against Israel is to go against the U.S. something most of the world isn’t interested in. Also the vast majority of Israel weapons come from us. They would not be able to get enough weapons fast enough without us. They also wouldn’t be able to afford to be so brazen if they didn’t have us to defend them on the global stage from the ICC, ICJ, & UN to on the battlefield with the threat that the US might get involved. So in short no Israel wouldn’t do

8

Anonymous #1 2w

No. I advocate for a two-state solution. The reason being is because you’ll never get the Israelis or Palestinians to live together peacefully, they’ll still kill each other in a one-state. My “idea” while definitely still somewhat idealistic, would be to have a coalition of Arab nations and probably the EU or US to be the force that keeps them divided. I will at least admit the problems in my ideas while this crazy fuck just wants to start more wars to kill people.

-2

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

keep moving that goalpost, just make sure you stretch before you do. wouldn’t want your little narcissistic ass to pull a muscle.

9

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

hell, your entire “name the nations” bullshit was a newly introduced goalpost in that conversation.

10

Anonymous #5 2w

A super apartheid & genocide if we cut them off 100% because they wouldn’t have the means without us. If they were to act the same without our backing it would be suicide & the only people who’s live would really be at risk would be that of the Israeli citizens if their government chose to keep acting the same

2

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

as we touched on in that convo, do you view WW2 as an event that occurred out of “just wanting to kill people”?

6

Anonymous #5 2w

I can’t speak for OP, but my argument is that while Israel does get weapons and bombs from us, they will either start to manufacture their own, or more than likely get them from someone else like India, Russia, or China. Cutting ties with them only sees the genocide change hands, not stop it. The only real competition against them would be Hezbollah/Lebanon due to them being considerably larger and more of a professional force than Hamas while having direct proximity unlike Iran.

-1

Anonymous #6 2w

No. I definitely don’t view WW2 as an event that occurred to stop genocide like you though lol

-1

Anonymous #6 2w

No it wasn’t lol. You said a fucking UN coalition 🤣 I asked you who, and you couldn’t name shit. That’s not a goalpost shifting, that’s asking you to define your fucking idea.

-1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I never claimed ww2 was started to stop genocide, you misinterpreted my statements and projected that assumption onto me (and still are). And yes, it was indeed a goalpost, I repeatedly stated in that conversation how I viewed my advocacy for a UN coalition as the equivalent of advocating for the creation of the allies powers. You need me to be saying something else, in order for you to discredit it. you’re a disingenuous sack of shit, and never forget that.

5

Anonymous #6 2w

WHAT COALITION?!? WHO?!? it’s not a fucking hard question to answer if it was actually even remotely realistic. You can literally ask me anything you want about a two state solution with a coalition that I suggest and I could at least give you tepid answers that aren’t based off of some crazy bloodlust to see Israeli and US citizens die because you want to invade them with your make believe UN coalition.

-1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Yeah but what makes you think China, Russia, or India would be Israel 🍆 riders like the U.S.? I highly doubt that any of them would give them a fraction of the support that we do. Also only China should have the resources & standing to support them to the same level & extent as us & I can’t see China doing that.

1

Anonymous #6 2w

No fucking shit I need you to say something else to discredit it 🤣 that’s kind of how ideas work. I can’t say WE NEED TO GIVE EVERYONE A FREE RIDE TO THE MOON AND BACK TO DISPROVE FLAT EARTH and not expect anyone with a temp of 98 to ask the follow up “how do you expect to actually do that though”

0

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

instantly jumped away from the ww2 topic after I corrected you, once again, huh? really? Your two-state obsession isn’t based out of bloodlust and dogma? you’re over here saying that two demographics can never coexist peacefully, like shut the fuck up.

1

Anonymous #5 2w

Is it possible they wouldn’t find another state partner/backer? Sure. Is it more likely they would find someone? Yes. One of the more complex parts to predict is how the people of Israel would react to their own government after being cut off. That is something I really am totally in the dark about.

0

Anonymous #6 2w

and I don’t know how many times I need to repeat the same shit in order for your arrogant ass to process it: I never advocated for specific countries, and I’m not entertaining your goalposts. I specifically stated a militant UN coalition to mimic how we internationally dealt with the axis powers in world war 2. you’re too fucking stupid to comprehend the difference between an idea and actually drawing up the entirety of a plan, which guess what, I’m not in the fucking United Nations?

1

Anonymous #6 2w

block me again, or shut the fuck up. the choice is yours, either way I’ll be very happy.

1

Anonymous #5 2w

People will try to compare it to South Africa because of their apartheid, but I don’t think they’re comparable at all aside from structural institutions that are used to carry it out. The important part is the conceptual idea as to why they’re doing it in the first place. Colonialism based on power and resource control could never last because the colonists didn’t have belief, they just had incentives for control. Zionism, which is an ethno-religious nationalist belief doesn’t work the same way.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

That’s right. Zionists are even worse than White South Africans were. Good point.

7

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Israel has turned themselves into Pariah state & the only reason most countries engage with them is because they’re rightfully seen as an extension of the U.S. so I think them finding another country to back them to extent that the U.S. is extremely unlikely & almost impossible since again China is one of the only countries with that capability to begin with & again I don’t see China or any other country treating Israel like how we do. As for how the Israeli citizens would react my guess is

7

Anonymous #6 2w

Yeah. I asked you for that militant UN coalition and who it would consist of and you still haven’t answered. You just keep saying “the UN”. I will always ask you the same question until you give me names of countries that it would consist of. You won’t name them because you know you’ll get laughed at for it by not just me, but everyone else.

1

Anonymous #5 2w

They would demand Israel continue like they have been & rally behind being abandoned by the U.S. & they would have the belief that they do need us anyways… but that attitude would quickly shift if Israel decided to keep going as if business is useless because they’re citizens would find out that they were wrong & not have any interest in keeping it going

6

Anonymous #1 2w

That’s too reductionist. I’m talking about the actual state of Israel itself. What drives that country to exist? You can’t keep calling Zionism an “apartheid racist genocidal colonial imperialist ideology” because that doesn’t mean anything to anyone. You’re just saying words just to say them at that rate. What I’m saying is you need to actual define what Zionism is and what they believe, not just what you think about it. In a former conversation, I compared it to Iran.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I mean I can name some other ethnonationalist movements who made claims of needing land for their people to live in exclusively, they’re all pretty fuckin evil people though.

10

Anonymous #1 2w

Which I believe Iran is similar in the sense that it is the “fortress” of Shia Islam. It’s why they fight the way they do and resist the US and Israel so vehemently. You can’t invade that country because they will fight to the literal death for their belief in it. Israel isn’t going to stop doing what they’re doing just because we cut them off, you might slow them down temporarily, but they will go even harder in the long term.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Like, if I talked about the main ethnonationalist movement in history that made claims of needing “living room” in order to continue their superior ethnicity, which they said to be historically dominant in the region, and unjustly persecuted by others to the point of needing genocide to survive, and how similar they are to Zionists, I’ll immediately be called an antisemite. Funny enough, I’ll get called a member of the group I’m saying is bad, and Israel is bad for acting and thinking like.

6

Anonymous #1 2w

Do you believe the state of Nazi Germany was all die-hard Nazi party members?

1

Anonymous #1 2w

Ignore that. No one is calling you an antisemite here, or at least I’m not. We’re just talking here.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

No, I don’t think that Nazi Germany was populated completely with Nazis. I also don’t care that some of the non-Nazis got caught in the crossfire when we had to go take out the Nazis.

9

Anonymous #1 2w

I think that’s where we’ll probably disagree then. I do care that people, who are essentially powerless or have no real position to make change, get mixed up in crossfire. It’s a philosophical perspective. I don’t want to assume your position, but I’m guessing you’re using a utilitarian/lesser evils thought process?

1

Anonymous #1 2w

An important side note in regard to the Nazis, they fought to the death, which resulted in a terrible loss of life on all sides. That’s what I’m implying Israel would do if backed into a corner. I’m not even bringing up nukes either, which a very important caveat as to why they’d never truly be invaded by a larger foe like the US if we somehow, in someone’s make believe fantasy, divested and decided the only way to stop them is invading them.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Yes, I am using a utilitarian thought process. I said it earlier in the thread, and I will say it again. I do not weep for Dresden. The Nazis had to go. The process of getting them gone was ugly, that sucks. Still not worth wasting my sympathies on.

4

Anonymous #1 2w

you’d think this would be a universally shared sentiment, but apparently not.

1

Anonymous #1 2w

You should. I understand your argument, but Dresden specifically wasn’t worth it by any metric. There were no military targets in the city nor did it change strategic morale. It called into question the effectiveness of strategic bombing aka “carpet bombing”, which is why Dresden and the Tokyo firebombing lead to it being outlawed by the Geneva convention…though I don’t really carry much stock in things like the UN, Geneva Convention, ICC, etc due to their inability to actually enforce.

1

Anonymous #5 2w

That’s one of the more unknown parts on Israel for me. If the average Israeli citizen is similar to a US citizen, then I think you’d be right and that they would eventually pressure their own government and possibly even reform entirely, which would be more similar to the to the South Africa apartheid reform. My main premise is still that I don’t believe Zionism is some inflated puffed up ideology that is all smoke and mirrors. I think they truly believe in that shit.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I mean yeah I think they believe it too. The question is are they willing to die & have everyone they know & care about die for it or when proven wrong will they stop to preserve their lives & the lives of their loved ones. Is dominating the region & the Palestinians worth dying over? Is equality with Palestinians Arabs so bad that death is seen as a better option? That’s the question the Israeli citizens would have to ask themselves after America broke ties with them

4

Anonymous #5 2w

I mean that’s largely the reason why I am the way that I am 🤷‍♂️ We’re not talking about a simple policy of denouncing Israel, we’re talking a monumental shift in the “soul” of the country. Not necessarily just on Israel specifically, but the willpower to actually follow through and having a set of values the country actually stands for. The first part of that especially…because your values don’t mean anything if you can’t actually put them into practice.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

isn’t that what we should be talking about in this moment? if a chunk of the population can’t even acknowledge a genocide or denounce it, specifically one being funded and orchestrated by our own government, then there’s something fundamentally wrong with the “soul” of said country.

6

Anonymous #6 2w

The prelude to WW2 was somewhat similar. Americans were largely non-interventionists and self-absorbed . I’ve stuck by this opinion since originally finding out about the Israel/Palestinian history, no one gives a literal fuck about them. Afghanistan is a prime example of where the modern American “heart, mind and soul” is. We invaded that country and left them after deciding that things weren’t working out, and have now doomed their fates to NEVER breaking out from the rule of the Taliban.

9

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Ahh wait, so your stance is rooted in the apathy of our fellow citizens? I apologize if ive been misinterpreting, as (correct me if I’m wrong) I didn’t realize you were essentially analyzing based on existing sentiment rather than what you personally view as should be done. I’d actually agree on the front of many people not giving a fuck, but I’d relate that back to the topic of there being an issue with the “soul” of our country (especially if we include the topic of isolationism preceding

4

Anonymous #6 2w

ww2, it took us being attacked to even consider joining the war efforts, and we all know the atrocities we committed in the aftermath of said attack) in all honesty, I view this commonality of apathy as a symptom/downstream effect of the roots of white supremacy in our nation, especially in relation to the aftermath of the civil war, and the lack of consequences for those who aligned with the confederacy.

6

Anonymous #6 2w

Forget whether invading was right or wrong, that’s an entirely different conversation. I’m talking about how it didn’t matter how we got there, but what you do when you’re in the middle of it. It’s why I don’t typically talk about Israel/Palestine until only recently. I don’t think a divestment is going to see us holding Israel accountable…instead, what WILL happen is it will see us washing our hands of it and saying “fuck this” and leaving the situation to unfold without us.

2

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I mean yeah what we did to Afghanistan & it’s people was/is evil & horrible. At the same time Israel is a different situation since Israel is an apartheid state doing a genocide & we’re funding that. It’s our duty to at least stop funding & running defense on the global stage. Now if Israel as a country decides to commit suicide as a result of U.S. not supporting their apartheid & genocide that’s on them but stopping support of the genocide & apartheid is on us

6

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

oh I agree with that in all honesty, and I know you may not agree with my proposal (and it is by no means a comprehensive one, purely a hopeful hypothetical), but that’s partially why I think about an external intervention for both nations (US and Israel) If we decided to turn our back on Israel now, I doubt it would be out of an intention of meaningfully and materially opposing genocide, but rather as you said, attempting to diminish responsibility while continuing in our own oppression

4

Anonymous #6 2w

(and I do not mean to imply that an external/UN-based intervention is the only means forward, but in all honesty I can’t see many other options aside from mass revolution, which we both know is highly unlikely in the current scenario and state of organization)

6

Anonymous #6 2w

I would say more then just stoping our funding but fully sanctioning Israel would be the best thing & military action would be a last resort if they tried to keep it going although idk how they would without or protection & backing.

5

Anonymous #5 2w

that’s very valid, and honestly yeah I’m not sure who they’d seek out for funding if we decided to cut them off, but as much as I hate it, I highly doubt the US would engage in meaningful sanctions against our own proxy state yk? Hell, we sanction nations like Cuba more than we do ones committing genocide😭

6

Anonymous #5 2w

This is where I reckon with the idealism of Neoliberalism vs the truth of the matter. Afghanistan is something that shouldn’t have happened…but my stance on it over time is believing that we should have stayed. If liberal democracy for that country was possible and essentially building that country up so they’d have something worth believing in, then that to me would have been the right choice. Of course, I’m not particularly fond of having other men die for my belief.

1

Anonymous #6 2w

I unfortunately believe you’re 100% right. I can’t see anyone funding them like us but I can’t really see us cutting funding & unlimited protection let alone sanctions. Cuba legit goes out of its way to help the world yet we sanction them in the way that we should Israel.

3

Anonymous #6 2w

Americans, or I guess people in general will never see long term. Specifically for us, we don’t have to sacrifice anything and we hate when we have the slightest bit of inconvenience.

6

Anonymous #6 2w

India would definitely jump in. The shit would be inferior, but bombs typically all blow up the same.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

tbh I could see India jumping in, possibly even north and South Korea as additional proxy states to avoid all-out world war as long as possible; but I just can’t envision a future where we actually do decide to cut funding and support, even if I personally hope for it :( same goes with my UN proposal too as much as I hate to say it. I can hope for a global coalition to combat this, but I fear it would never happen based on the current state of the world.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

Germany is responsible for 30% of their imports rn

1

Anonymous #5 2w

At this rate we live in some twisted ass backrooms we call planet earth

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

To finish my thought, 🤷‍♂️ it only takes one leader. FDR is fawned over for all his policies, but when it comes to WW2, no one talks about his mind on it. I don’t think he thought we’d be attacked or anything, but he knew we’d eventually be dragged into the war long before that reality set in, so he started preparing us for it with military changes, war-time economy preparation, and building the belief into Americans that liberal democracies like the U.K., France, etc were worth believing in.

1

Anonymous #7 2w

Germany is probably their 2nd largest ally. I’d have to see what they receive in weaponry from them. Shit…that would be a fucked timeline though. Germany reigniting its war industry to help Israel.

6

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

I hear where you’re coming from regarding Afghanistan. At the same time that was never going to happen because as you know our intentions weren’t pure so doing something to genuinely help the people won’t happen. A system is what it does not what it claims it does. We claim we go to help but we never actually help.

3

Anonymous #5 2w

Also I fully agree with your assessment about people not thinking long term & not having to sacrifice anything while complaining about the slightest inconvenience

6

Anonymous ___joker__ 2w

The thing about Germany is they don’t have an army. So while Germany may or may not continue to send them weapons if America left Germany still wouldn’t have the ability to give them as much as they had so they would be greatly reduced in weapons so plus other countries wouldn’t have to worry about the threat of Germany militarily getting involved as a deterrent

5