• megopie@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Frankly I don’t like the “but we could be spending this better at home” argument because the people making that argument invariably would refuse to actually do so, and instead just give out another tax cut.

    That money would never end up going in to a single payer healthcare system, SNAP, education or building out more sustainable infrastructure. We don’t do these things not because we don’t have the money for it, we don’t do these things because they would undermine the influence of large financial and corporate interests.

    There is a much better argument to not fund Israel, and it is that they’re attempting to ethnically cleanse the Gaza Strip, have flaunted all of the treaties and agreements they made for near on 20 years, and they’re current leadership was undemocratically put in power.

    • eveninghere@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Guessing it’s Russian propaganda or sympathy towards Gazans, the latter I find these days in The Intercept.

      This article weirdly ignores the attached budget for Ukraine, which is the actual point of Biden’s proposal.

      • megopie@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Because Ukraine is generally a fairly popular foreign ally with little mainstream controversy around supporting them. So if you wanted to undermine support for them, easier to knee cap support for the bill from the other direction.

    • SalaTris@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t know: Does that framing take away from the international law argument? How long has that argument been in play and how has that worked so far? It’s a powerful framing in that it illustrates the power that money being used to fuel hate could instead have for some semblance of good. Even if it’s impractical among today’s US elected officials. Also, arguments like this are how to get negotiation leverage. In general in this political climate, while we might want to be prepared to compromise I challenge the wisdom of leading with a compromise. I say different strategies need to be tried until something sticks.

      • megopie@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The framing is a poor one, it is built on a fundamental lie about how money works in the US government. It’s a very weak framing that only ever convinces people who already wanted to defund a foreign effort. More importantly, most of this bill isn’t tied to Israel, it’s tied to other efforts like Ukraine, so really what this is arguing for is to stop supporting Ukraine. Most of the funding for Israel comes through other channels.

        So to support this framing is to just undermine support for Ukraine and do little to stop Israel. Support for Ukraine is non-negotiable.

        • SalaTris@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Can you elaborate on what specifically the “lie” is? The logical side of me takes the words “truth”, “fact”, and “lie” very seriously, and I worry that we too often use them to express a point of view including pragmatism. I’m genuinely curious!

  • al4s@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t think money is the real issue here. It’s already budgeted for the military anyways - if it’s used to help other countries that’s a good thing in my book. Well unless it’s “helping” by funding the bombing of civilians, but what do I know.

    • Comrade GitGud@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I partially agree with you, in that if that money could be used to help other countries that would at least be providing value to the world. Unfortunately I don’t believe it’s being used that way in this case. Money going to Israel is being used to massacre Palestinian civilians en masse (culminating in what is very likely, and I consider, a genocide), and money going to Ukraine is going to prolong a conflict that the USA has been explicitly preventing from reaching any potential diplomatic resolution. Yes, it would be ideal if Russia pulled out of Ukraine and left them alone but Russia won’t do that when it holds the best cards and the best chance for that was earlier in the war when Ukraine had lots of military funding that wasn’t being diverted to the Gaza Genocide and most of its troops and fighting-age population weren’t crippled or dead.

      • flatbield@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Frankly do not agree with your assessment especially about Ukraine. Russia still retains maximal aims. Ukraine still retains the ability to militarily defeat Russia but the west has been a day late and a dollar short. Manpower. That is a Ukranian political decision. Ukrainian losses have been not that large compared to their population. Similar in ratio to Russian losses to their population.

        Gaza is harder. No good solution. The residents of Gaza choose this by choosing Hamas as their government and starting a war with Israel. Iran is similarly responsible.

        Edit: The amount of money the US has put into either conflicts is minimal, had been spend largely in the US, and has no relation to social funding.

        • Comrade GitGud@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Ukraine still retains the ability to militarily defeat Russia but the west has been a day late and a dollar short.

          I think that may have been the case at one point, but if you look up Ukraine and prosthetics, and compare to the population and military strength you’ll see that it’s more than a day late at this point. Even if you’re of the opinion that deaths aren’t that high, prostheses need paints a grim picture for the future of that conflict. Countries like France were trying to negotiate settlements and ceasefires earlier in the war but the US kept blocking them and hinging financial and military support on not negotiating, which is how we got where we are there.

          The residents of Gaza choose this by choosing Hamas as their government and starting a war with Israel. Iran is similarly responsible.

          First, I disagree. Hamas was elected decades ago and there have been no elections since, and more than 50% of Gaza was children before Oct 7th. The majority of people who live in Gaza did not elect Hamas.

          Secondly, even if this was the case, what were Gazans going to do about their situation, protest? Israel controls and controlled flow of trade (via a blockade), water, and electricity into Gaza before this conflict. A huge percentage of the Gaza population had injuries from IDF soldiers deliberately shooting them in the kneecaps from earlier protests or getting too close to the fences they erected. On top of that, Israel helped fund Hamas and got them into power, so Oct 7 was just Israel reaping what it sowed. Gaza was an open air prison hosting a slow genocide before this conflict, all that’s happened now is Israel moving up the timetable.