How’s a no-fly zone sound? Cuz if South Africa succeeds in it’s case against Israel, the UN charter compels member states (including the US) to take action to prevent genocide.
Israel can continue the offensive with or without US support, that are already well equipped and can produce their own ammunition. I don’t understand why they are portrayed as some poor nation. They said themselves that they will continue the offensive with or without help.
So fucking let them go at it alone. It’s not 1948, nor 1967, America shouldn’t be supporting this militarily, nor provide political immunity at the UN via UNSC veto - actual or threatened
I’m tired of seeing US supplied ordinance given to unreliable actors, and then any criticism roundly rejected
The US is in this specific conflict to make their cut of the warbucks and maintain diplomatic ties, not to provide critical aid and support. That and provide a disincentive for anyone else to step in or protest.
Thanks for the link, and it shows precisely that his position is very considered, difficult, and nuanced, which is as it should be on a morass like the situation in the middle east.
If you followed the news, you would know that he has been critical of US support of Israel this entire time.
why no call for a ceasefire?
Cutting funding does more to bring about a seize fire than just asking nicely
We shouldn’t ask nicely.
How’s a no-fly zone sound? Cuz if South Africa succeeds in it’s case against Israel, the UN charter compels member states (including the US) to take action to prevent genocide.
Defunding Israel is a good start, though.
Israel can continue the offensive with or without US support, that are already well equipped and can produce their own ammunition. I don’t understand why they are portrayed as some poor nation. They said themselves that they will continue the offensive with or without help.
So fucking let them go at it alone. It’s not 1948, nor 1967, America shouldn’t be supporting this militarily, nor provide political immunity at the UN via UNSC veto - actual or threatened
I’m tired of seeing US supplied ordinance given to unreliable actors, and then any criticism roundly rejected
The US is in this specific conflict to make their cut of the warbucks and maintain diplomatic ties, not to provide critical aid and support. That and provide a disincentive for anyone else to step in or protest.
He did AFAIK.
He didn’t.
He still isn’t, in fact. I’d still like to see him officially change his position on a ceasefire but I’ll take defunding Israel as a compromise.
Thanks for the link, and it shows precisely that his position is very considered, difficult, and nuanced, which is as it should be on a morass like the situation in the middle east.
Being nuanced on the issue of genocide is disappointing.
If you followed the news you would know he refused to endorse the calls for a ceasefire. Very disappointing.