1. It will be funny to watch the Team D Cult insist that a President Harris would have appointed unreconstructed hippies, pacifists and the like, but at the same time also backed Israel to the hilt.
2. During the runup to the Second War On Iraq, the United States also piously proclaimed that it was seeking a peacful solution, even as it was obvious that the United States was seeking a war on any possible pretext.
Viewing all of this from my secret hideout in outer space, it looks like Trump and his gang are working very hard to get more and more countries to join BRICS+.
I want to avoid a war with Iran, but I see no problem taking a very firm stance toward a country that has vociferously and consistently backed “death to America.”
Yes; of course we’ve committed very bad foreign policy errors, but you learn and move on. I believe the US should remain engaged in the world’s problems. I want us to continue to hold military primacy over Russia and China to deterr to them. Your portrayal of Iran as a benign power is off the mark. Its extremist proxies in Iraq, Lebanon,and Yemen foment violence and meddle in the internal affairs of these unstable states to further Tehran’s aims of regional hegemony.
Any force in the Middle East that we don't like is regularly described as an "Iranian proxy". Try applying that logic to the United States Empire. Not to mention the claims that Iran seeks "regional hegemony", but yet it is ever always only the United States that attacks.
For a country that, as you argue, likes to attack, the US has spent a lot of time recently trying to persuade the Israelis to avoid a wider conflict with Iran.
Biden failed during an election year to halt Israeli excesses in Gaza and hasn’t had much luck with a Lebanese ceasefire, but I would argue he has successfully restrained Israeli retaliatory action against Iranian missile attacks.
To say that Israel is dependent on the US “for all of its military endeavors” is an exaggeration. The Israelis have their own robust defense industry. As recent events have shown, they have a strong intelligence service. In some areas, a cut off of US aid would have an immediate impact, but it would take time to have the kind of paralyzing overall result you seem to be advocating. I will say, however, that I have long thought that the US provides too much assistance to Israel, which is a wealthy country capable of bearing much more of its own defense.
1. It will be funny to watch the Team D Cult insist that a President Harris would have appointed unreconstructed hippies, pacifists and the like, but at the same time also backed Israel to the hilt.
2. During the runup to the Second War On Iraq, the United States also piously proclaimed that it was seeking a peacful solution, even as it was obvious that the United States was seeking a war on any possible pretext.
Viewing all of this from my secret hideout in outer space, it looks like Trump and his gang are working very hard to get more and more countries to join BRICS+.
I want to avoid a war with Iran, but I see no problem taking a very firm stance toward a country that has vociferously and consistently backed “death to America.”
The last time Iran invaded another country was in the 18th century, when it was still "Persia".
Compare the track record of the eminently peace-loving United States since that time.
For that matter, ask yourself what the United States did in Iran to deserve such bad words.
Yes; of course we’ve committed very bad foreign policy errors, but you learn and move on. I believe the US should remain engaged in the world’s problems. I want us to continue to hold military primacy over Russia and China to deterr to them. Your portrayal of Iran as a benign power is off the mark. Its extremist proxies in Iraq, Lebanon,and Yemen foment violence and meddle in the internal affairs of these unstable states to further Tehran’s aims of regional hegemony.
Any force in the Middle East that we don't like is regularly described as an "Iranian proxy". Try applying that logic to the United States Empire. Not to mention the claims that Iran seeks "regional hegemony", but yet it is ever always only the United States that attacks.
For a country that, as you argue, likes to attack, the US has spent a lot of time recently trying to persuade the Israelis to avoid a wider conflict with Iran.
Oh really? The United States could halt Israel with a single phone call. But it doesn't.
The Israeli goal is for the United States to do the fighting for it. Perhaps you recall the neocons talking of "taking out" seven countries.
Biden failed during an election year to halt Israeli excesses in Gaza and hasn’t had much luck with a Lebanese ceasefire, but I would argue he has successfully restrained Israeli retaliatory action against Iranian missile attacks.
To say that Israel is dependent on the US “for all of its military endeavors” is an exaggeration. The Israelis have their own robust defense industry. As recent events have shown, they have a strong intelligence service. In some areas, a cut off of US aid would have an immediate impact, but it would take time to have the kind of paralyzing overall result you seem to be advocating. I will say, however, that I have long thought that the US provides too much assistance to Israel, which is a wealthy country capable of bearing much more of its own defense.