President Joe Biden pleaded with Republicans on Wednesday for a fresh infusion of military aid for Ukraine, warning that a victory for Russia over Ukraine would leave Moscow in position to attack NATO allies and could draw U.S. troops into a war.
Biden spoke as the United States planned to announce $175 million in additional Ukraine aid from its dwindling supply of money for Kyiv. He signaled a willingness to make significant changes to U.S. migration policy along the border with Mexico to try to draw Republican support.
“If Putin takes Ukraine, he won’t stop there,” Biden said. Putin will attack a NATO ally, he predicted, and then “we’ll have something that we don’t seek and that we don’t have today: American troops fighting Russian troops,” Biden said.
“We can’t let Putin win,” he said, prompting an angry reaction from Moscow.
I really hope that Ukraine doesn’t lose their support. If America has to choose between supporting Ukraine in defending themselves from a Russian invasion, and supporting Israel’s obvious goal of carrying out a genocide, it seems like a no brainer to me…
The problem is for the American government the answer is also a no brainer, but they don’t agree with you on the specifics of that no brainer. Israel will always get what it asks for because its a de facto US army base. Look at how the rest of the MIC hamstrings the budget, fails audits, then gets budget increases.
You’re probably right. I just wish we didn’t live in a world where innocent human lives are often considered the cost of doing business.
Many of the evils of buisness are hidden in what economists would call ‘externalities’. Which in essence are consequences that you don’t have to pay for. Human cost has been factored in from the begining and named such that it sounds ‘external’ to the system when really it’s part and parcel of it. Something like most of the forbes 500 would not be profitable if they were liable for their own externalities. Buisnesses on every level are subsidized by the taxpayer and the degradation of local resources or environment that should have been for the public.
– and “stabilizing element” in the middle east. Israel gets a lot of leeway because they’ve proven they have a capable military, intelligence agency, etc. And they’re not at all squeamish about using them.
Pick one
Most people consider the US to have somewhat capable intelligence, but 9/11 still happened.
Yes but word is that they had plenty of intelligence about a major operation. So it wasn’t a lack of intelligence as much as arrogance in the leadership, at best. At worst, well you’d have to get into some dark conspiracy theory.
They bombed a car with a grandma and her three grandkids in Lebanon saying they were terrorists. Israeli “intelligence” is nothing more than AI over satalite imagery and web scaping.
It’s worthless if they just gather a mountain of information but can’t filter any real useful intel from it.
Just curious, where does the ‘genocide’ come from regarding Israel? The stuff I’ve read usually points a very different picture.
To those down voting this person, I really don’t think its called for here. There’s nothing to suggest they’re some troll trying to spread misinformation. The details of this conflict have been kept intentionally vague; coming to a different conclusion doesn’t necessarily imply bad intentions.
Try to remember the down vote isn’t a ‘fuck you’ button. Let’s not be like reddit.
I’m not a war correspondent or anything, so my opinion is based exclusively on reading accounts of the conflict which I consider to be reputable. That said, when you compare the death toll on either side of the conflict – 17,000 dead Palestinians so far, as compared to the 1,200 Israelis killed during Hamas’ Oct 7 incursion – its easy to see why so many experts have concluded that Israel’s intentions go far beyond retaliation against Hamas alone.
And that’s without even mentioning Israels controversial approach to military targets, the lies they’ve been caught in throughout the conflict, and so on.
Hey, not that I have sources and most likely not qualified to talk about this; But aren’t some of the hitpieces on the civilian casualities also been under hamas control?
There’s information on things being a genocide and also other information saying that hamas is using them as human shields?
Personally I don’t know what to think of Israels actions, since I am very confused about the happenings there. I agree on military action on hamas, but at the same civilian casualities should be kept to a minimum. If you have any more info to read?
Just some other points that I’ve read; Hamas vs Israel has been going on forever now, rockets being shot from gaza Hamas siphoning aid funds to buy/create weapons Hamas using headquarters mostly in populated areas, like hospitals to create propaganda?
Any information to counter whatever beliefs I have are more than welcome, I’d rather be educated on the matter. This post might seem pro-israel, but I decided to focus on the war, not Israel, which I do have major issues with.
Waited to reply so I’m not spreading misinformation in active threads lol.
The bombing of innocent civilians in Gaza in order to destroy Hamas is the genocide being referred too. For Israel, it seems killing innocent civilians is a bonus. Israel’s allies, including the US, are starting to get irritated with the fact that Israel is basically completely disregard for civilian life in Gaza. Israel’s response is basically, we need to kill off Hamas because they want genocide of Israel (not certain of the specifics of Hamas’ goals, but I would definitely that they are generally terrorist group that has control of Gaza, and do want to see Israel fall) so killing civilians is collateral damage. The issue though is that Israel has helped prop up Hamas to keep as an enemy that they think they can control, and use the existence of that enemy as a reason to continue to push out Palestinians from their land. This continued harassment of Palestinians pushes them to join Hamas, and drives Hamas’ actions. This is also partly why Israelis are angry at Netanyahu(?) and his administration, he claimed the power is was scooping up domestically, and using it to exert control on Palestinian land, would keep Israel safe. Instead, they’ve had the biggest attack ever with many Israelis dead.
A critical analysis of past Israeli positions and current actions, basically. In brief, Israel refuses any solution that lets the people of Palestine stay, they can’t leave because they have nowhere to go, and Israel’s military policy is that it’s okay to kill them. The easiest path forward for Israel is genocide, and its current actions are congruent with that. (E.g. directing civilians to a place of refuge, and then bombing it.)
Remember, even Germany’s Third Reich didn’t set out to perpetrate a genocide, but circumstances drove them to it.
Whaaaa? Mein Kampf was written in 1925. Genocide was planned from before Nazis were even in power.
No circumstances drove them to it.
I chose those words carefully, and said Third Reich, not Hitler. Even the moniker “the final solution” comes from “the final solution to the Jewish question,” which implies that it had tried other solutions previously. The Nazis wanted Jews out of Germany, and as such had done things like encourage Jewish emigration to Palestine before the war. Then they escalated to pogroms and work camps, and before deciding on a Holocaust because they were
losing the war and(edit, in retrospect not the correct interpretation) running low on resources, and that was the most expedient way to clear Jews out of Germany.It’s worth remembering that history, since Israel now seems to be on a similar trajectory with Palestinians.
Extermination was planned from the beginning and started before Germany had lost a single battle. Germany wasn’t forced into Holocaust because they were losing the war.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_camp
I think what they meant is that Hitler never dreamt he’d gain enough influence to actually make his vision a reality. He thought he may be able to integrate more land into Germany, for instance, but carrying out a genocide in practice is far more complicated than wishing for a genocide in theory.
Circumstances such as German outrage over the treaty of Versailles, the power vacuum surrounding the failing health (and eventual death) of Hindenburg, and unlikely alliances with players such as Japan and the Soviet Union, lent themselves to Hitler pursuing his actual goal of genocide.
That being said, I’m basing all of this on some episodes of Real Dictators I listened to this week, so take my points with a grain of salt.
Check a few telegram channels and watch the videos: wargonzo, JuanSinMiedo, Intel Slava Z, Patrick Lancaster News Today.