407
submitted 3 months ago by negativenull to c/politics
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] fluxion 243 points 3 months ago

Good. Not a fucking dime until Ukraine gets much needed funding. And then still not a fucking dime because Israel has proven to be quite capable of leveling Gaza with the resources they already have and are at absolutely 0 risk of losing any territory whatsoever.

[-] [email protected] 29 points 3 months ago

What if we fund Ukraine's defense instead of Israel's offense?

[-] [email protected] 24 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I was under the impression there was Ukraine aid in this bill. But I agree, I'd rather fund them separately.

Edit: And Israel not at all, at the moment.

[-] billiam0202 23 points 3 months ago

The Senate bill has Ukraine aid, border security stuff, and "aid" for Israel. Mike Johnson was throwing a tantrum that the GOP/Dem Senate leadership didn't include him in their negotiations (seriously, he sent out a letter to the House yesterday morning whining about it) so he decided to bring a bill up with just "aid" for Israel.

As you can see, he is continuing the proud tradition of effective GOP Speakers. 🙄

[-] Ensign_Crab 8 points 3 months ago

The speaker of the house is mad that he wasn't involved in senate business? Sounds like a fucking excuse to me.

[-] MotoAsh 1 points 3 months ago

The speaker doesn't have to be involved in all things. They aren't on every committee.

[-] Ensign_Crab 4 points 3 months ago

Yes, the speaker of the house really shouldn't be involved in senate business. That's what I was saying. It was a bullshit excuse on the speaker's part.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

The Speaker typically has major sway over the budget even though they aren't on the Ways and Means Committee.

That said, it is usually tradition for the Senate to come up with the compromise when the House and President are at odds and can't negotiate their own deal.

[-] billiam0202 1 points 3 months ago

I imagine that during bipartisan Senate negotiations it'd be prudent and/or courteous to include the House leadership as well, to avoid this exact kind of embarrassment.

[-] drmoose 18 points 3 months ago

Could someone explain what's the argument in favor of US funding Israel with these amounts other than securing a geopolitical partner in middle east?

[-] Not_mikey 42 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Israel is not even a good geopolitical partner in the Middle East. Nearly everyone hates them so whenever we do operations over there we keep them out because we know even their presence will increase tensions and lose hearts and minds. They're good for spying on Iran but you have to take everything with a grain of salt because they could be lying in order to try and get us to be more confrontational because they despise Iran.

The reasons the U.S. government overwhelmingly supports Israel is:

  • evangelicals think the Jews taking over Israel will cause the rapture, which they want...
  • Sheer inertia
  • the idea that Israel is "an island of liberal democracy" in a sea of authoritarian Arab states
  • Heavy lobbying from organizations like AIPAC, and if you don't follow their line they'll spend millions on you opponent's campaign.
  • Military industrial complex loves sales to Israel
  • military industrial complex relies on technology and equipment from Israel
  • Islamaphobia and the idea that they're fighting the good fight against the evil terrorists
  • residual guilt for the Holocaust and the west's antisemitic past
[-] themeatbridge 5 points 3 months ago

Your list is spot on, and what's interesting about it is the strange bedfellows it creates. You have a coalition of literal Nazis, Orthodox Jews, and Intelligence Agencies calling for more bombs to fight fascism and spread democracy.

[-] billiam0202 3 points 3 months ago

The thing about American Nazis is, yes they are virulently anti-Semitic but they also are usually fiercely steeped in their twisted version of Christianity, which says the Jews have to be in Israel for Armageddon to happen. Then they'll get their heavenly rewards while the rest of us are punished forever, since they see us as the cause of all their problems.

They're perfectly willing to tolerate Jews' existence, as long as it's not here in America.

[-] billiam0202 4 points 3 months ago

APEC

I think you mean AIPAC.

[-] Not_mikey 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah your right, got it confused with a conference around here that they still have ads up for. Edited

[-] billiam0202 28 points 3 months ago

Modern day Christianity is a death cult begging for the end of the world to happen and according to their mythology, Israel has to occupy that particular piece of dirt, regardless of whoever is already there. And since a still-significant portion of the American electorate are superstitious and arms manufacturers are so wealthy, our politicians are more than happy to pander to the one to take donations from the other.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's even more sinister than that even; not only are they looking forward to the world ending, they think that they are the only ones getting into "heaven" and everyone else will be tormented in "hell" forever.

They look forward to the few million of them getting a "reward" while the other 10 billion people burn. That's the mentality of a lunatic that doesn't deserve to be allowed in civilization, but instead, society had deemed their lunacy a protected class.

Nevermind that their own Bible says specifically that only 144k people will get into heaven and even then it's only male Jewish virgins.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

Besides the religious angle, the funding we give to Israel tends to come right back into the pockets of US military contractors. This is great if you like military contractors. I'm not one of those people, but they apparently exist.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] [email protected] 46 points 3 months ago

Good on two levels. Fuck Israel and fund Ukraine, you bootlicking GOP cowards.

I'll take funding Israel and Ukraine together if we have to, because one war we can make a difference in, and the other we can't, but the sin of backing Israel at this point, when it is blatantly obvious they are freely murdering Palestinians without cause, will be another stain on US history.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Daft_ish 26 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Lol, we're not getting a border deal but this means we can't be evil in the middle east! Quick. Let's do it ad hoc.

Anyone of you assholes who said Trump wouldn't fund Isreal, read it and weep. Fascist dickwads.

[-] stoly 2 points 3 months ago

LOL nothing pisses people off more than pointing out that not voting for Biden is the same as voting for Trump. They have no response to that fact and it causes them to rage.

[-] Daft_ish 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's like, we are all mad about it too but if we ever want shit to change you need to first stand against the GOP in its current form. It's the absolute very least you can do and people BITCH about it to no end.

[-] stoly 1 points 3 months ago

Yep. My paraphrase:

"OH BUT BIDEN DIDN'T DO THE LIST OF THINGS THAT I PERSONALLY WANTED AND DID THE THINGS THAT EVERY DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT EVER HAS DONE AND NOW I'M SUPER SAD ABOUT THE WHOLE THING."

[-] BradleyUffner 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It makes people angry because it's an illogical nonsense argument. If it were true then it follows that not voting for Trump is the same as voting for Biden, and therefore not voting at all must be the same as voting for BOTH Trump and Biden.

[-] Ensign_Crab 1 points 3 months ago

Let’s do it ad hoc.

A la carte, even.

[-] Daft_ish 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Have you seen America's evil acts selection? The options are endless!

[-] [email protected] 23 points 3 months ago

Not surprising. I mean, what all have they passed lately?

The GOP seems to think that the legislative branch is in place to prevent laws from passing.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

legislative branch is in place to prevent laws from passing.

Umm, pretty sure it's by design. Can't have too much Democracy.

[-] Madison420 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Considering a not insignificant amount of the founding fathers were openly anti democratic to the point of being what would later be called fascist it's not particularly surprising.

[-] [email protected] 23 points 3 months ago

It can't be long until they turn on Johnson, right?

That's what authoritarians do. They delete failed leaders from their ranks and then from history.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

After a couple of retirements, the margins are now so thin that it might result in a Democrat becoming Speaker. Matt Gaetz and his crew may or may not be smart enough to realize this.

[-] fne8w2ah 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Fuck the politicians who are in only for the money.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Don't forget the power. The money is nice, but it's really just the means to having power over other people.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

at this point, i feel embarrassed for them

[-] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

'Fails' is very much the right word there.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
407 points (99.3% liked)

politics

17792 readers
3938 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS