Comments by "J Nagarya" (@jnagarya519) on "White House has secret plan to force Netanyahu out!" video.
-
2
-
It isn't that simple. Israel isn't the problem -- most Israelis want Netanyahu gone. The problem is Netanyahu and his extreme right-wing gang.
But in view of the content of Schumer's speech -- the words "pariah nation" -- Netanyahu can't win this one. He hasn't the power in relation to the US and his DEPENDENCY on the US. Schumer's words can't be written off because he's a Jew who has always supported Israel, but has had enough of Netanyahu's fascism. Schumer's speech is intended, and will, cause an earthquake in Israel
The US has the opportunity to finally, after 80 years, to shift the dynamic away from backing everything the Israeli gov't does to imposing conditions on the foreign policy that doesn't jeopardize the US's reputation.
Netanyahu supports TRUMP, and is also trying to undermine Biden. You should be SUPPORTING Biden. IN FACT: were that you knew anything about politics beyond the superficial, you'd have HEARD Biden saying, ALL ALONG, that Israel's policies in Gaza are totally indefensible. But foreign policy TAKES TIME; it is not a realm for the impatient unless they want to FAIL or make matters worse. In view of the history of the foreign policy, it takes time to BUILD to the point of making the issue PUBLIC.
And it is coordinated. The first PUBLIC comment was made by Vice President Harris. Then it was Biden's "accidental" "hot mic" comment. Next it was other Biden administration lower-level people. Then it was Senator Schumer -- that is the CENTRAL statement -- and then Biden reiterated BACKING Israel, but only as a single isolated statement.
Israel, and Netanyahu's gov't, are NOT THE SAME THING.
Even when I was 20, and the issue was Vietnam, I was never so politically naive and lacking in understanding that bought the far-Left demand for instant results -- because that isn't how REALITY works. So stop the simpleton's stupidity without regard for unintended consequences.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@markclipsham9199 Not even a college student.
For hundreds of years there were wars among western European nations -- typically England, France, and Germany -- usually two would side against the third.
Twice those resulted in world wars that sucked the United State in. On the United States' initiative, NATO was estalished to put a stop to those wars -- and that has been a success.
NATO was also established to crate a mutual DEFENSE pact for western Europe -- and East Block members -- against traditionally imperialist Russia. That is why it is a Putin lie that NATO is a "threat" to Russia; NATO is strictly defensive.
And, as the United States put boots on the ground in Europe when sucked into those two world wars, and it resulted in great loss in treasure and troops, NATO is also the first line of defense of the United States against expansionist Russia. Better "they" fight 'them" "there" than the US yet again save Europe's ass from Russia.
President Obama understood that vis-a-vis Libya: Europe expected the US to take the lead -- why not? Republicans had given them that expectation by sidestepping diplomacy in order to start shooting wars. But Obama pointed out that Libya is EUROPE'S front yard, not the US's, but that the US would supply air support -- NO US boots on the ground.
Certainly the US is a treaty member of NATO -- READ the US Constitution: treatises are a part of the Constitution; a president cannot withdraw from the Constitution. And therefore the US owes NATO dues also. Trump -- who has been proven in court not to pay his bills -- is falsifying the relationship: the US does not fund NATO. And the amounts each NATO member is required to spend is for their DOMESTIC self-defense. The total amount for each member differs because the members aren't all the same size in land mass and population.
Withdraw from NATO and the US is US boots on the ground again. Opposed to war? -- then defend NATO.
And while at it, provide Ukraine the assistance it needs -- other NATO members are doing so -- in defense of democracy against Russia's illegal invasion based on the LIE that NATO being on Russia's border is a "treat" -- which is used as an excuse to threaten to invade, as example, Poland -- the result of which would be NATO on Russia's border, again according to Russia's LIE a "threat".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1